Influence of parity and infant age on maternal self‐efficacy, social support, postpartum anxiety, and postpartum depression in the first six months in the Maritime Provinces, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: After giving birth, women experience significant changes related to maternal self-efficacy and social support and are at risk of experiencing postpartum anxiety and depression. PROBLEM: No studies have focused on the relationship between parity and infant age and their impact on psychosocial outcomes, particularly in a Canadian context. AIM: To explore the relationship between parity and infant age on perceived maternal self-efficacy, social support, postpartum anxiety, and postpartum depression. METHODS: Women from three Canadian provinces within the first 6 months postpartum completed standardized online questionnaires. Multivariate analysis of covariance was used to examine the primary aim. FINDINGS: A total of 561 women (56.5% primiparous, 55.1% infant 0-3 months) participated. There were significant main effects for both parity (P < .001) and age of infant (P < .001), but no significant interaction (P = .463). Primiparous women had lower maternal self-efficacy (P = .004) and higher postpartum anxiety (P = .000) than multiparous women. Women with younger infants had more perceived social support (P = .002). Women with older infants had higher levels of postpartum anxiety (P = .003) and depression (P = .000). DISCUSSION: The transition that women experience, independent of parity, within the first six months is dynamic with women of older infants experiencing more postpartum mental health concerns and less perceived social support. Our findings emphasize that postnatal support should extend beyond the typical six-week follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: Additional studies are warranted to determine ways to provide ongoing support throughout the first six months and beyond to improve maternal well-being and address postpartum needs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".