MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407953714 · doi:10.1136/bjsports-2024-109604

Impact of sleep on postpartum health outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2025· review· en· W4407953714 on OpenAlexafffund
Zain Khan-Afridi, Stéphanie-May Ruchat, Paris A T Jones, Muhammad Usman Ali, Brittany A. Matenchuk, Andrew We Jantz, Kier Vander Leek, Lauren Maier, Laura Osachoff, Melanie Hayman, Milena Forte, Allison Sivak, Margie H. Davenport

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Sports Medicine · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai HospitalMcMaster University Medical CentreMcMaster UniversityUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresWomen and Children’s Health Research Institute
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchWomen and Children's Health Research Institute
KeywordsMedicineAnxietyObservational studyPhysical therapyOdds ratioPopulationMeta-analysisPsychological interventionInternal medicinePsychiatryEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of postpartum sleep interventions and postpartum sleep on maternal health outcomes. DESIGN: Systematic review with random-effects meta-analysis. Online databases were searched on 12 January 2024. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies of all designs (except case studies and reviews) in all languages were eligible if they contained information on the population (individuals up to 1-year post partum), sleep interventions/exposures including (type, duration, frequency, alone or in combination with other components), comparator (control or different duration, frequency or type of sleep intervention) and outcomes: mental health, cardio-metabolic, postpartum weight retention (PPWR), low back pain and pelvic girdle pain, breastfeeding and urinary incontinence. RESULTS: 60 studies (n=20 684) from 14 countries were included. 'High' certainty of evidence showed that sleep interventions were associated with a greater decrease in depressive symptom severity compared with no intervention (five randomised controlled trials; n=992; standardised mean difference -0.27, 95% CI -0.40 to -0.14; small effect). Sleep interventions had no impact on the odds of developing depression ('moderate' certainty of evidence) or anxiety or anxiety symptom severity ('low' certainty of evidence). Additionally, 'low' certainty of evidence demonstrated no effect on cardiometabolic outcomes (systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, mean arterial pressure), anthropometric measures (maternal weight, body mass index) or prevalence of exclusive breastfeeding. 'Low' certainty of evidence from observational studies found that high-quality sleep reduces the odds of developing anxiety and reduces the severity of depression and anxiety symptoms. 'Low' and 'very low' certainty of evidence from observational studies found that shorter sleep duration is associated with greater PPWR. CONCLUSIONS: Postpartum sleep interventions reduced the severity of depression symptoms.

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.045
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.111

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.045
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0240.047
Bibliometrics0.0100.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.363 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations10
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Sports MedicineSame topicSleep and related disordersFrench-language works237,207