Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29327321›Full record

ArticleMaternal and child health journal2018

Preliminary Psychometric Testing of the Postpartum Depression Predictors Inventory-Revised (PDPI-R) in Portuguese Women.

Stephanie Alves, Ana Fonseca, Maria Cristina Canavarro, Marco Pereira

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Maternal and child health journal, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Peripartum Predictors of the Risk of Postpartum Depressive Disorder: Results of a Case-Control Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

4 authors.

Stephanie AlvesFaculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Coimbra, Rua do Colégio Novo, 3000-315, Coimbra, Portugal. stephanie.alves@student.fpce.uc.pt.ORCID 0000-0002-7326-7115
Ana FonsecaFaculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Coimbra, Rua do Colégio Novo, 3000-315, Coimbra, Portugal.
Maria Cristina CanavarroFaculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Coimbra, Rua do Colégio Novo, 3000-315, Coimbra, Portugal.
Marco PereiraFaculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Coimbra, Rua do Colégio Novo, 3000-315, Coimbra, Portugal.

Funding

Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia IF/00402/2014Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia SFRH/BD/102717/2014Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia SFRH/BPD/93996/2013
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction Postpartum depression (PPD) is a prevalent condition with a serious impact. The early identification of women at risk for developing PPD allows for primary prevention and the delivery of timely appropriate referrals. This study investigated the validity and reliability of the postnatal version of the Postpartum Depression Predictors Inventory-Revised (PDPI-R), an instrument widely studied internationally, in Portuguese women. Methods The sample consisted of 204 women who participated in an online cross-sectional survey. Participants completed the European Portuguese versions of the PDPI-R, the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS), and the Postnatal Negative Thoughts Questionnaire at 1-2 months postpartum. Additionally, ROC analyses were performed to conduct an exploratory analysis of the instruments' predictive validity. Results The prevalence rates of clinical postpartum depressive symptoms were 27.5 and 14.2% using the cut-off scores of 9 and 12, respectively, on the EPDS. The European Portuguese postnatal version of the PDPI-R demonstrated acceptable reliability and satisfactory construct and convergent validity. When using the EPDS > 9 cut-off score, the exploratory analyses yielded a sensitivity of 76.8% and a specificity of 73.0% with a cut-off score of 5.5 [area under the curve = 0.816]. Discussion These preliminary findings encourage the use of the postnatal version of the PDPI-R as a screening tool to identify Portuguese women at high risk for developing PPD. Subsequent assessments are needed to support the routine application of the PDPI-R both in research and for clinical purposes.

Indexed as

AdultDepressionDepression, PostpartumFemaleHumansMass ScreeningMothersPortugalPostpartum PeriodPsychiatric Status Rating ScalesPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsRisk AssessmentSensitivity and SpecificitySurveys and QuestionnairesYoung AdultPostpartum depressionReliabilityRisk factorsScreeningValidity

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.