“There is always a waitlist”: The experiences of perinatal women randomized to a waitlist condition in a trial evaluating a novel online self-directed intervention for perinatal anxiety
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Pregnant and postpartum women are at a heightened risk for the development or worsening of mental health problems, with elevated rates of mood and anxiety disorders noted across studies. Timely access to mental health supports is critical during the perinatal period (spanning pregnancy to 1 year postpartum), to mitigate potential negative impacts on mother and child. In general adult populations, a small body of research has highlighted the association between being waitlisted for mental health services with a deterioration in mental health. Given the influx of changes experienced in the perinatal period, this population may face unique challenges around being waitlisted. There is a lack of research exploring the experiences of perinatal women waitlisted for psychological services. The current study seeks to understand the experiences of perinatal women randomized to the waitlist condition of a randomized controlled trial. Methods: = 20 participants (4 pregnant, 16 postpartum) from Central Canada who were enrolled in a novel online self-directed intervention for perinatal anxiety completed a virtual qualitative interview concerning their experience during the 6-week waitlist period for this randomized controlled trial. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed according to reflexive thematic analysis. Results: Seven main themes were identified, depicting the waitlist experiences of perinatal participants: (a) "There is always a waitlist" (sub-themes: service availability, need to seek out services pre-emptively); (b) Timing of support access is vital during the perinatal period (sub-themes: prenatal, postpartum); (c) Responses to being waitlisted (sub-themes: disappointment, neutral, relief, "there's probably somebody that needs it more than I do"); (d) Identification of helpful supports during the waitlist period (sub-themes: formal supports, informal supports); (e) Connections with research team (sub-themes: communication, resource provision); (f) Impact of waitlist experience on desire to start program (sub-themes: excitement, "out of sight, out of mind," nervousness); and (g) Improving the waitlist experience (sub-themes: communication, resource provision, triaging). Discussion: Findings highlight the need for timely access to mental health supports during the perinatal period and offer several recommendations for improving the waitlist experience, including providing more frequent waitlist status updates, providing more direct access to intermediate interventions, and triaging patients based on clinical need.
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 | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".