Adult separation anxiety in pregnancy: how common is it?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Valsamma Eapen,1,2 Derrick M Silove,1,3 Deborah Johnston,1,2 Alex Apler,1,2 Susan Rees1,31School of Psychiatry, University of New South Wales, Sydney, 2Infant Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service, Academic Unit of Child Psychiatry, 3Center for Population Mental Health Research, Psychiatry Research and Teaching Unit, South West Sydney Local Health District, Liverpool, NSW, AustraliaAbstract: The present study, the first to examine adult separation anxiety (ASA) in the context of pregnancy, found that ASA is a common yet unrecognized condition. Women attending an antenatal clinic were evaluated for the presence of ASA. A quarter of the women reached an established symptom threshold for ASA, with significantly more primigravida women (P = 0.003) identified as having the problem. There were no significant differences in the sociodemographic characteristics between those with and without ASA. Around one-third acknowledged that ASA was causing significant impairment in day-to-day functioning, suggesting the clinical importance of the pattern. Further research is indicated to explore this clinical entity and its impact on maternal and infant psychosocial wellbeing.Keywords: separation anxiety, perinatal mental health, prevalence, sociodemographic factors.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".