Feasibility of online mindfulness-based interventions for families affected with postpartum depression and anxiety: study protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Postpartum depression and anxiety (PPDA) is experienced by up to 20% of families in the first year. The condition impacts not only parents but also their developing child. While mindfulness-based interventions (MBI) have shown to be beneficial for this population, many parents do not have access to treatment or find it challenging to commit or complete the treatment. The COVID-19 pandemic has heightened some of the challenges that parents face. The ability to find time for needed self-care and health interventions is also affected by limited childcare support. The opportunity to attend a group online may significantly improve the accessibility to group MBI but may also bring challenges. This study aims to examine the feasibility and acceptability of online MBI groups for parents in families affected with PPDA. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In this feasibility study, participants will include mothers diagnosed with PPDA and their partners. Two online MBI groups will run simultaneously for 8 weeks: one for mothers with PPDA and another one for their partners. The primary outcome will be feasibility of conducting the online groups, assessed from the facilitators' perspective, participants' perspective and attrition throughout the study. The participants' perspectives on feasibility will be assessed by questions including how difficult it was for them to make it to the sessions, specific obstacles encountered and their scheduling preferences. The facilitators' perspective will be assessed by frequency of technical difficulties encountered, of disruptions in the online sessions and of episodes where parents leave the screen (eg, to calm their child). Secondary outcomes will include mental health, couple relationship, satisfaction and acceptability which will also be evaluated through participant questionnaires. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has received ethics approval from the University of British Columbia Children's and Women's Research Ethics Board. Study results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04617132.
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 | 0.024 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.046 | 0.008 |
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".