MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402888584 · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2024.1411761

Prenatal maternal mental health and resilience in the United Kingdom during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: a cross- national comparison

2024· article· en· W4402888584 on OpenAlexaffabout
Swarali Datye, Marko Smiljanić, Rohan Shetti, Alison MacRae-Miller, Edwin van Teijlingen, Latha Vinayakarao, Eva M.J. Peters, Catherine Lebel, Lianne Tomfohr‐Madsen, Gerald F. Giesbrecht, Minesh Khashu, Melanie L. Conrad

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Psychiatry · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of British Columbia
FundersEuropean Maritime and Fisheries Fund
KeywordsMental healthAnxietyPsychiatryMedicineSocial supportCoping (psychology)AngerPandemicPublic healthPregnancyClinical psychologyPsychologyDiseaseCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Nursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Prenatal mental health problems are associated with morbidity for the pregnant person, and their infants are at long-term risk for poor health outcomes. We aim to explore how the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic affected the mental health of pregnant people in the United Kingdom (UK), and to further identify resilience factors which may have contributed to varying mental health outcomes. We also aim to examine the quality of antenatal care provided during the pandemic in the UK and to identify potential inadequacies to enhance preparedness for future events. Methods: During June-November 2020, we recruited 3666 individuals in the UK for the EPPOCH pregnancy cohort (Maternal mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic: Effect of the Pandemic on Pregnancy Outcomes and Childhood Health). Participants were assessed for depression, anxiety, anger and pregnancy-related anxiety using validated scales. Additionally, physical activity, social support, individualized support and personal coping ability of the respondents were assessed as potential resilience factors. Results: Participants reported high levels of depression (57.05%), anxiety (58.04%) and anger (58.05%). Higher levels of social and individualized support and personal coping ability were associated with lower mental health challenges. Additionally, pregnant individuals in the UK experienced higher depression during the pandemic than that reported in Canada. Finally, qualitative analysis revealed that restrictions for partners and support persons during medical appointments as well as poor public health communication led to increased mental health adversities and hindered ability to make medical decisions. Discussion: This study revealed increased mental health challenges among pregnant individuals in the UK during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. These results highlight the need for reassessing the mental health support measures available to pregnant people in the UK, both during times of crisis and in general.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.118

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.341 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PsychiatrySame topicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and PostpartumFrench-language works237,207