Unmet Parental Mental Health Service Needs in Neonatal Follow-Up Programs: Parent and Service Provider Perspectives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Parental mental health services in neonatal follow-up programs (NFUPs) are lacking though needed. This study aimed to determine (1) the unmet mental health needs of parents and (2) the parent and provider perspectives on barriers and opportunities to increase mental health service access. Study 1: Parents in a central Canadian NFUP (N = 49) completed a mixed-method online survey (analyzed descriptively and by content analysis) to elucidate their mental health, related service use, barriers to service use, and service preferences. Study 2: Virtual focus groups with NFUP service providers (N = 5) were run to inform service improvements (analyzed by reflexive thematic analysis). The results show that parents endorsed a 2–4 times higher prevalence of clinically significant depression (59.2%), anxiety (51.0%), and PTSD (26.5%) than the general postpartum population. Most parents were not using mental health services (55.1%) due to resource insecurity among parents (e.g., time, cost) and the organization (e.g., staffing, training, referrals). Consolidating parents’ and service providers’ perspectives revealed four opportunities for service improvements: bridging services, mental health screening, online psychoeducation, and peer support. Findings clarify how a central Canadian NFUP can address parental mental health in ways that are desired by parents and feasible for service providers.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".