Social support as a coping resource for psychosocial conditions in postpartum period: a systematic review and logic framework
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This review seeks to examine the current state of postpartum social support and psychosocial conditions among women around the world, as well as explore the relationship between these factors. Additionally, it aims to propose a logical framework for enhancing postpartum social support and psychosocial conditions in this population. METHODS: Following the development of a search strategy, two databases, PubMed and Science Direct, were searched for studies published between January 2019 and May 2023. The search was conducted throughout the entire month of May 2023. The risk of bias in the included cross-sectional studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale, which was adapted for this specific study design. To determine if the main objective of the cross-sectional studies was to investigate the relationship between social support and postpartum psychosocial conditions, a review was conducted based on the AMSTAR checklist, PRISMA checklist and PRISMA flow diagram. Data extraction was performed with the consensus of two authors, and a narrative synthesis approach was chosen for data synthesis, following the guidelines provided by the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD). RESULTS: Eleven cross-sectional studies were included in the final analysis. Our findings revealed that all reviewed studies provided evidence of a positive association between social support and healthy psychosocial conditions in postpartum period. However, due to the absence of standardized measurement indicators to identify and compare the outcomes of various studies, there was a need to develop a conceptual framework that could enhance our understanding of the postpartum psychosocial condition including anxiety, depression, unfavorable quality of life and social support status up to 24 month after child birth. This framework aimed to incorporate childbirth and motherhood as "stressful events," while considering social support as a crucial "coping resource." Furthermore, it acknowledged empowerment, help-seeking behavior, and peer support as important "coping actions," alongside implementing client-centered interventions. Lastly, it recognized postpartum mental health and optimal quality of life as significant "effects" of these factors. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed conceptual framework could define postpartum women's health as "the ability to adapt and self-manage."
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 | 0.028 | 0.072 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.027 | 0.018 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 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".