Sleep, biological rhythms and anxiety in the perinatal period: a systematic review protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Pregnancy and new parenthood is an exciting time, but also a stressful life event that can predispose to mental health challenges. Perinatal anxiety is one such challenge, and is an important contributor to parental distress and other negative outcomes. Sleep and biological rhythms are often disrupted in the perinatal period. These disruptions have been associated with postpartum depression, and in some cases with perinatal anxiety. However, the literature concerning the association with perinatal anxiety is inconsistent and may be methodologically limited. To our knowledge, there has been no comprehensive review published characterising the relationships between sleep, biological rhythms, and perinatal anxiety and related disorders to date. In this systematic review, we will summarise the current state of the literature concerning these relationships, allowing us to highlight gaps and potentially inform clinical understanding of perinatal anxiety, sleep and biological rhythms. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Primary research articles will be eligible for inclusion if they assess perinatal anxiety or related disorders using validated criteria (self-report or diagnostic), assess sleep and biological rhythms in the perinatal period, include >4 participants and meet other inclusion/exclusion criteria. We will conduct comprehensive searches of MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Embase and CINAHL, with coverage spanning from database conception to search date (August 1, 2021). Key search concepts include (1) the perinatal period, (2) sleep/biological rhythms and (3) anxiety. Risk of bias will be evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Data will be narratively synthesised, with quantitative synthesis included if possible. When relevant, strength of evidence will be assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation criteria, and potential publication bias will be assessed. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Research ethics approval is not required. Study results will be reported according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Results will be disseminated to relevant stakeholders as conference presentation(s) and submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: 200166.
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 | 0.049 | 0.061 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.020 | 0.012 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.018 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.064 | 0.006 |
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".