MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3134175910 · doi:10.1186/s40738-021-00098-3

The prevalence of depression symptoms among infertile women: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021· review· en· W3134175910 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Zahra Kiani, Masoumeh Simbar, Sepideh Hajian, Farid Zayeri

Bibliographic record

VenueFertility Research and Practice · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Health and Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeta-analysisPsycINFOCochrane LibraryMedicineDepression (economics)Confidence intervalInfertilityAnxietyMEDLINEScopusDemographyMental healthPublication biasPsychiatryInternal medicinePregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Infertile women’s mental health problems, including depression, are key fertility health issues that affect infertile women more severely than infertile men. Depression may threaten the health of individuals and reduce the quality of their lives. Considering the role and impact of depression on responses to infertility treatments, a systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to investigate the prevalence of depression symptoms among infertile women. Methods International databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Sciences, Scopus, Embase, and PsycINFO), national databases (SID and Magiran), and Google Scholar were searched by two independent reviewers for articles published from 2000 to April 5, 2020. The search procedure was performed in both Persian and English using keywords such as “depression,” “disorders,” “infertility,” “prevalence,” and “epidemiology.” The articles were evaluated in terms of their titles, abstracts, and full texts. The reviewers evaluated the quality of the articles using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale, after which they analyzed the findings using STATA version 14. The I2 and Egger’s tests were performed to examine heterogeneity and publication bias, respectively. Results Thirty-two articles were subjected to the meta-analysis, and a random effects model was used in the examination given the heterogeneity of the articles. The samples in the reviewed studies encompassed a total of 9679 infertile women. The lowest and highest pooled prevalence rates were 21.01% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 15.61–34.42), as determined using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and 52.21% (95% CI: 43.51–60.91), as ascertained using the Beck Depression Inventory, respectively. The pooled prevalence values of depression among infertile women were 44.32% (95% CI: 35.65–52.99) in low- and middle-income countries and 28.03% (95% CI: 19.61–36.44) in high-income countries. Conclusion The prevalence of depression among infertile women was higher than that among the general population of a given country. Especially in low- and middle-income countries, appropriate measures, planning, and policy that target the negative effects of depression on infertile women’s lives should be established to reduce related problems.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0210.040
Bibliometrics0.0100.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.281
GPT teacher head0.520
Teacher spread0.239 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations150
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFertility Research and PracticeSame topicReproductive Health and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207