Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28389421›Full record

Trial reportJournal of medical Internet research2017

Pregnant Women's Views on the Feasibility and Acceptability of Web-Based Mental Health E-Screening Versus Paper-Based Screening: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Dawn Kingston, Marie-Paule Austin, Sander Veldhuyzen van Zanten, Paula Harvalik, Rebecca Giallo, Sarah D McDonald, Glenda MacQueen, Lydia Vermeyden, Gerri Lasiuk, Wendy Sword and 1 more

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of medical Internet research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 27 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT01899534 nacompletednot on this map

Mental Health E-screening in Pregnant and Postpartum Women

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of CalgaryRan2013 to 2014Enrolled566ConditionsDepression, AnxietyArmsE-screening
NCT03803189 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

Proactive, Personalized Postpartum Mental Healthcare (P3MH): Designing and Testing an eHealth Intervention to Deliver Proactive, Personalized Postpartum Mental Healthcare for New Parents in Primary Care

TypeinterventionalSponsorWomen's College HospitalRan2019 to 2021Enrolled130ConditionsPostpartum Depression, Postpartum Blues, Postpartum Anxiety, Postpartum Mood DisorderArmsUsual care plus eToolkit
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Technologies Applied to the Mental Health Care of Pregnant Women: A Systematic Literature Review.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2023
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Dawn KingstonFaculty of Nursing, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-7183-2803
Marie-Paule AustinUniversity of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6957-0656
Sander Veldhuyzen van ZantenDivision of Gastroenterology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-1702-8750
Paula HarvalikFaculty of Nursing, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-4446-1872
Rebecca GialloMurdoch Childrens Research Institute, Royal Children's Hospital, Parkville, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1065-2921
Sarah D McDonaldMcMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-4461-2178
Glenda MacQueenUniversity of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-3352-6781
Lydia VermeydenFaculty of Nursing, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-7995-731X
Gerri LasiukCollege of Nursing, University of Saskatchewan, Regina, SK, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-5478-3520
Wendy SwordUniversity of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-0378-2266
Anne BiringerDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-0865-9091

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMajor international guidelines recommend mental health screening during the perinatal period. However, substantial barriers to screening have been reported by pregnant and postpartum women and perinatal care providers. E-screening offers benefits that may address implementation challenges.

objectiveThe primary objective of this randomized controlled trial was to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of Web-based mental health e-screening compared with paper-based screening among pregnant women. A secondary objective was to identify factors associated with women's preferences for e-screening and disclosure of mental health concerns.

methodsPregnant women recruited from community and hospital-based antenatal clinics and hospital-based prenatal classes were computer-randomized to a fully automated Web-based e-screening intervention group or a paper-based control group. Women were eligible if they spoke or read English, were willing to be randomized to e-screening, and were willing to participate in a follow-up diagnostic interview. The intervention group completed the Antenatal Psychosocial Health Assessment and the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale on a tablet computer, while controls completed them on paper. All women completed self-report baseline questions and were telephoned 1 week after randomization by a blinded research assistant for a MINI International Neuropsychiatric Interview. Renker and Tonkin's tool of feasibility and acceptability of computerized screening was used to assess the feasibility and acceptability of e-screening compared with paper-based screening. Intention-to-treat analysis was used. To identify factors associated with preference for e-screening and disclosure, variables associated with each outcome at P<.20 were simultaneously entered into final multivariable models to estimate adjusted odds ratios (AORs) and 95% CIs.

resultsOf the 675 eligible women approached, 636 agreed to participate (participation rate 94.2%) and were randomized to the intervention (n=305) or control (n=331) groups. There were no significant baseline differences between groups. More women in the e-screening group strongly or somewhat agreed that they would like to use a tablet for answering questions on emotional health (57.9%, 175/302 vs 37.2%, 121/325) and would prefer using a tablet to paper (46.0%, 139/302 vs 29.2%, 95/325), compared with women in the paper-based screening group. There were no differences between groups in women's disclosure of emotional health concerns (94.1%, 284/302 vs 90.2%, 293/325). Women in the e-screening group consistently reported the features of e-screening more favorably than controls (more private or confidential, less impersonal, less time-consuming). In the multivariable models, being in the e-screening group was significantly associated with preferring e-screening (AOR 2.29, 95% CI 1.66-3.17), while no factors were significantly associated with disclosure.

conclusionsThe findings suggest that mental health e-screening is feasible and acceptable to pregnant women.

trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT01899534; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01899534 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6ntWg1yWb).

Indexed as

InternetAdultAnxietyDepressionFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansMass ScreeningMental HealthPaperPatient Acceptance of Health CarePregnancyPregnancy ComplicationsTelemedicinecomputersmental healthpregnancyprenatal carescreening

Identifiers

PMID28389421
PMCPMC5400885

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.