Perinatal trauma with and without loss experiences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: The present study explored differences in mental health between women who experienced a trauma which involved a loss of fetal or infant life compared to women whose trauma did not involve a loss (difficult childbirth). Method: The sample consisted of 144 women (mean age = 31.13) from the UK, USA/Canada, Europe, Australia/New Zealand, who had experienced either stillbirth, neonatal loss, ectopic pregnancy, or traumatic birth with a living infant in the last 4 years. Results: The trauma without loss group reported significantly higher mental health problems than the trauma with loss group (F (1,117) = 4.807, p = .03). This difference was observed in the subtypes of OCD, panic, PTSD and GAD but not for major depression, agoraphobia and social phobia. However, once previous mental health diagnoses were taken into account, differences between trauma groups in terms of mental health scores disappeared, with the exception of PTSD symptoms. Trauma groups also differed in terms of perceived emotional support from significant others. Conclusion: The findings illustrate the need for a change in the focus of support for women’s birth experiences and highlighted previous mental health problems as a risk factor for mental health problems during the perinatal period.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".