Impact of Traumatic Childbirth and Birth‐Related Posttraumatic Stress Disorder on Breastfeeding Outcomes: A Systematic Review of Longitudinal and Cohort Studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Breastfeeding is the most recommended form of infant nutrition during the first months of life. Mother's perception of childbirth as traumatic, or birth-related diagnosis of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) or symptoms (PTSS), may negatively affect breastfeeding outcomes, but there is not enough evidence about its influence. The aim of this study was to examine and summarize the available literature on the impact of traumatic childbirth and/or PTSD/PTSS related to childbirth on breastfeeding outcomes. METHODS: Following PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO: CRD42023407019), a systematic review of prospective longitudinal and cohort studies was conducted, involving searches across PubMed, PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science, and PsycARTICLES. The PICOS model guided inclusion criteria, and the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS) was used to assess study quality. RESULTS: From the 1471 identified records, eight studies (involving 3091 participants) met our inclusion criteria and demonstrated an overall low risk of bias, according to NOS. Results consistently revealed a negative association between traumatic childbirth and/or birth-related PTSS/PTSD and breastfeeding outcomes, including initiation, duration, self-efficacy, and exclusive breastfeeding in the baby's early months. DISCUSSION: A traumatic birth can have lasting effects on both maternal mental health and breastfeeding outcomes. LIMITATIONS: Potential omission of relevant studies despite searches across five databases and the absence of a calculated size effect, preventing the determination of the strength of the studied variables' relationship. Predominant focus on European studies questions the generalizability of the results. CONCLUSION: Mothers suffering from traumatic childbirth and/or childbirth-related PTSS or PTSD have an increased risk of poorer breastfeeding outcomes. REGISTRATION AND PROTOCOL: The systematic review protocol was registered in PROSPERO. The registration number is: CRD42023407019.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".