MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411475676 · doi:10.1016/j.ssmqr.2025.100592

Media exposure to maternal health trauma: A qualitative study on its effects on Black women's mental health

2025· article· en· W4411475676 on OpenAlexaff
Diane B. Francis, Nadia Kyeremeh, Nia Mason, S McFarlane, Kallia O. Wight

Bibliographic record

VenueSSM - Qualitative Research in Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMigration, Health and Trauma
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences North
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthQualitative researchMaternal healthMedicinePsychologyBlack womenObstetricsPsychiatryEnvironmental healthHealth servicesSociologyGender studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Black women experience disproportionately higher rates of death, illness, and mental health issues during and after pregnancy. The recent surge in avoidable maternal deaths in the U.S. has alarmed national and local media. Despite the media’s responsibility to inform, its coverage of traumatic events may negatively affect people’s mental health. This research examined if and how exposure to media narratives regarding maternal healthcare experiences affected the mental health of Black women. Between June and September 2020, we interviewed thirty Black women who had given birth within the prior 18 months. The data were analyzed using thematic analysis. The main themes were: 1) sources of and experiences with traumatic maternal health narratives, 2) the stressful effects of media, and 3) the media’s role in fostering positive communication. We found that traumatic maternal health narratives in the media affect the mental health of Black women. However, such narratives also facilitated valuable discussions between the women, their partners, family, and healthcare providers. Thus, despite being a potential source of stress, media exposure can cultivate positive communication patterns.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.008
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.259
GPT teacher head0.626
Teacher spread0.367 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSM - Qualitative Research in HealthSame topicMigration, Health and TraumaFrench-language works237,207