Association between postpartum depression and postpartum hemorrhage: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction Postpartum depression (PPD) is a growing mental health concern worldwide and has detrimental effects on the social and cognitive health of both mothers and infants. This review was performed to assess the risk of PPD in women with postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) and to identify potential moderators. Material and methods The review protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database on June 17, 2023 (registration number: CRD42023432955). Two researchers independently performed a literature search of the PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases for articles published before May 25, 2023, with no filters and no language or location restrictions. Study quality was evaluated using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. The primary outcome was the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of PPD in women with vs. without PPH. We performed sensitivity analyses and meta‐regression analyses to resolve heterogeneity. Meta‐regression analyses included the effects of age, maternal smoking, marital status, preterm labor, maternal education level, preeclampsia, anemia during pregnancy, and cesarean section. Results In total, seven studies involving 540 558 participants met the eligibility criteria and were included in the meta‐analysis. Women with PPH were at increased risk of PPD compared with women without PPH (OR 1.10; 95% CI 1.03–1.16), and heterogeneity was low (I2 = 23%; τ2 = 0.0007; p = 0.25). Moreover, the results of the sensitivity analyses showed that the I2 value decreased from 23% to 0% after excluding one particular study, which may have been a source of heterogeneity. In the meta‐regression analyses, the OR of PPD was greatly affected by maternal smoking (OR −0.26; 95% CI −0.30 to −0.22; p < 0.001). However, we did not observe any effects for maternal age, marital status, preterm labor, maternal education level, preeclampsia, anemia during pregnancy, or cesarean section. Conclusions Women with PPH must be closely monitored because they have a higher risk of PPD than women without PPH. Early recognition and management of these patients will improve treatment outcomes, maternal health, and newborn development.
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 | 0.011 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.016 | 0.029 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".