A longitudinal study examining the associations between prenatal and postnatal maternal distress and toddler socioemotional developmental during the COVID‐19 pandemic
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Elevated psychological distress, experienced by pregnant women and parents, has been well-documented during the COVID-19 pandemic. Most research focuses on the first 6-months postpartum, with single or limited repeated measures of perinatal distress. The present longitudinal study examined how perinatal distress, experienced over nearly 2 years of the COVID-19 pandemic, impacted toddler socioemotional development. A sample of 304 participants participated during pregnancy, 6-weeks, 6-months, and 15-months postpartum. Mothers reported their depressive, anxiety, and stress symptoms, at each timepoint. Mother-reported toddler socioemotional functioning (using the Brief Infant-Toddler Social and Emotional Assessment) was measured at 15-months. Results of structural equation mediation models indicated that (1) higher prenatal distress was associated with elevated postpartum distress, from 6-weeks to 15-months postpartum; (2) associations between prenatal distress and toddler socioemotional problems became nonsignificant after accounting for postpartum distress; and (3) higher prenatal distress was indirectly associated with greater socioemotional problems, and specifically elevated externalizing problems, through higher maternal distress at 6 weeks and 15 months postpartum. Findings suggest that the continued experience of distress during the postpartum period plays an important role in child socioemotional development during the COVID-19 pandemic.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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 it