MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3174325821 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-639959/v1

Antenatal Depressive Symptoms in Rwanda: Rates, Predictors, and Social Support

2021· preprint· en· W3174325821 on OpenAlexafffund
Marie Providence Umuziga, Darius Gishoma, Michaela Hynie, Leatitia Nyirazinyoye

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersGlobal Affairs Canada
KeywordsEdinburgh Postnatal Depression ScaleSocial supportMedicineAntenatal depressionPregnancyDepression (economics)Logistic regressionConfoundingOdds ratioDemographyOddsPsychiatryDepressive symptomsPsychologyAnxiety

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract BackgroundPrevalence of perinatal depression is high in Rwanda and has been found to be associated with the quality of relationship with partners. This study extends this work to examine the relationship between antenatal depressive symptoms and social support across several relationships among women attending antenatal care services. Methods Structured survey interviews were conducted with 396 women attending antenatal care services in 4 health centers in the Southern Province of Rwanda. The Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) and Maternity Social Support Scale (MSSS) were used to assess antenatal depressive symptoms and the level of support respectively. Socio-demographic and gestational information, pregnancy intentions, perceived general health status, and experience of violence were also collected. Univariate, bivariate analyses and a multivariate logistic regression model were performed to determine the relationship between social support and predictors of antenatal depressive symptoms. ResultsMore than half of respondents were married (55.1%) or living with a partner in a common-law relationship (28.5%). About a third (35.9%) were in their 6th month of pregnancy; the rest were in their third term. The prevalence of antenatal depressive symptoms was 26.6% (EPDS ≥ 12). Bivariate analyses suggested that partner and peer support negatively predict depression level symptoms.Adjusting for confounding variables such as unwanted pregnancy (AOR: 0.415, CI: 0.221- 0.778), parity (AOR): 0.336, C.I: 0.113–1.000) and exposure to extremely stressful life events (Odds Ratio = 2.300, C.I. = 1.263–4.189), husband/partner support (AOR: 4.458, CI: 1.833- 10.842) was strongly significantly associated with antenatal depressive symptoms such that women reporting good support were less likely to report depression level symptoms than those reporting poor support or those with no partner. Peer support was no longer significant.Conclusion The study revealed that social support may be a strong protector against antenatal depressive symptoms but only support from the partner. This suggests that strengthening support to pregnant women may be a successful strategy for reducing the incidence or severity of maternal mental health problems, but more work is required to assess whether support from peers can compensate for absent or unsupportive partners.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.354 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square→Same topicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum→French-language works237,207→