Behavioral Interventions for Postpartum Depression: systematic literature review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Este trabalho consiste em uma revisão sistemática que analisa as intervenções de base comportamental realizadas com puérperas diagnosticadas com Depressão Pós-Parto. Foram seguidos os protocolos do Prisma Statement. Foi realizada uma busca sistemática da literatura nas bases de dados Scielo, Pepsic, Embase, PsychInfo e Pubmed de artigos publicados em língua portuguesa e inglesa entre janeiro de 2013 e maio de 2022. Foram encontrados 42 estudos que preenchiam os critérios de inclusão estabelecidos. Esses estudos foram sintetizados e foi avaliada a qualidade da evidência a partir das ferramentas PeDro, JBI e Newcastle-Ottawa. Os resultados apontam para uma predominância da abordagem cognitivocomportamental em detrimento da análise do comportamento e terapias de terceira onda. A realização de atendimentos domiciliares e remotos foram as adaptações mais feitas para o público-alvo. Não foram encontradas adaptações feitas para os fatores de risco: questões de saúde na gravidez, gestação na adolescência e problemas conjugais.
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 | 0.011 | 0.058 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".