A Qualitative Systematic Review of Experiences and Barriers Faced by Migrant Women with Perinatal Depression in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Perinatal depression is the onset of depressive symptoms during pregnancy and up to one year after childbirth. Migrant women are at higher risk of experiencing perinatal depression due to numerous psychosocial stressors related to their experiences. This qualitative review aims to aggregate the experiences and barriers to care faced by immigrant and refugee women in Canada who have perinatal depression. Qualitative research can elucidate the barriers to treatment and culturally-impacted experiences of Canadian migrant women with perinatal depression. Following PRISMA and Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) guidelines for conducting qualitative systematic reviews, 13 eligible studies representing 10 samples (N = 262 participants) were identified and included in this review. Participants included service providers, immigrant women, and refugee women. Three synthesized themes were identified by this review using the JBI meta-aggregative approach: (1) culture-related challenges; (2) migration-related challenges; and (3) service accessibility and quality. Within these themes were experiences of migrant women that encompass six categories: (1) conceptualization of perinatal depression; (2) childbirth-specific challenges; (3) migration-related challenges; (4) social isolation; (5) accessibility of services; and (6) quality of care. The role of family, cultural differences, financial challenges, and the effects of these on service accessibility are impactful in the experiences of migrant women. A greater understanding of the role of both culture and migration in the delivery of care, especially regarding service provider attitudes in more representative samples, is recommended.
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 | 0.027 | 0.063 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.015 | 0.025 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".