MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4212803890 · doi:10.9778/cmajo.20210136

Pregnant people’s responses to the COVID-19 pandemic: a mixed-methods, descriptive study

2022· article· en· W4212803890 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Hamideh Bayrampour, Sukhpreet K. Tamana, Amélie Boutin

Bibliographic record

VenueCMAJ Open · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPandemicFeelingAnxietyThematic analysisDescriptive statisticsPopulationPsychologyMedicineQualitative propertyDescriptive researchQualitative researchFamily medicineClinical psychologyPsychiatryCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)DiseaseEnvironmental healthSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Given the extent of the COVID-19 pandemic and uncertainty around the timing of its containment, understanding the experiences and responses of the perinatal population is essential for planning responsive maternity care both during and after the pandemic. The aim of this study was to explore the experiences of pregnant people and their responses to the COVID-19 pandemic, and to identify how health care providers can support this population. METHODS: This was a mixed-methods, descriptive study with cross-sectional and qualitative descriptive components. We conducted the study between Mar. 20 and May 31, 2020, in British Columbia, Canada. Any pregnant person at any gestational age living in BC was eligible to participate. We collected quantitative data using online survey tools, including the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) and the 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder questionnaire (GAD-7). We collected qualitative data using open-ended questions to explore people's thoughts, feelings and experiences during the pandemic. Participants were recruited using study posters distributed via prenatal care clinics and classes, LifeLabs and social media across the province. We used thematic and descriptive analyses to analyze the data, and we integrated the qualitative and quantitative findings at the interpretation level. RESULTS: = 34) reported anxiety and depressive symptoms, as measured by the GAD-7 and EPDS, respectively. Overarching themes that emerged from the qualitative data included uncertainty about birth plans and setting, added burden to existing health and social disparities, perceived or projected lack of support or limited support, concerns about early development, and struggle over managing multiple demands. Perceived maternity care needs included mental health support, maintaining prenatal care, frequent and proactive check-ins to build rapport, and recommendations specific to the pandemic. INTERPRETATION: We found that the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the pregnant population has been substantial. The findings of this mixed-methods study can be used to help plan informed and evidence-based health care interventions to mitigate adverse effects and support mothers and families.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.129
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations13
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCMAJ OpenSame topicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and PostpartumFrench-language works237,207