Anxiety and depressive symptoms in first-time parents: A dyadic longitudinal study based on attachment theory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to examine the temporal and dyadic associations between anxiety and depressive symptoms during the transition to parenthood (TTP), while exploring the antecedence of attachment insecurities in these associations. METHOD: Couples of first-time parents (N = 211) completed the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale, the Experiences in Close Relationships scale, and a sociodemographic questionnaire during the second trimester of pregnancy and at four and twelve months postpartum. RESULTS: Both prenatal anxiety and depressive symptoms predicted postnatal depressive and anxiety symptoms. Prenatal attachment-related anxiety predicted higher postnatal anxiety and depressive symptoms whereas prenatal attachment-related avoidance predicted higher postnatal depressive symptoms only. Parents whose partners had a higher level of prenatal attachment-related anxiety experienced higher postnatal anxious and depressive symptoms via their own's prenatal depressive symptoms. Parents whose partners had a higher level of prenatal attachment-related avoidance experienced higher postnatal depressive symptoms via their own's prenatal anxious symptoms. No gender differences were found for these associations. LIMITATIONS: The sample was predominantly composed of educated heterosexual French-Canadian Caucasian couples and all measures were self-reported. CONCLUSIONS: Our original findings suggest that professionals should routinely screen for anxiety and depressive symptoms in both partners from pregnancy up to one year postpartum. Also, our findings suggest addressing attachment insecurities with both partners to prevent the development of future symptoms during pregnancy or after childbirth. Finally, our study supports the relevance of considering these symptoms at subclinical levels during the TTP.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".