Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29580213›Full record

Trial reportBMC pregnancy and childbirth2018

Feasibility and acceptability of expressive writing with postpartum women: a randomised controlled trial.

Rosalind Crawley, Susan Ayers, Susan Button, Alexandra Thornton, Andy P Field, Suzanne Lee, Andrew Eagle, Robert Bradley, Donna Moore, Gill Gyte and 1 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. 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.

Rosalind CrawleySchool of Psychology, University of Sunderland, Chester Road, Sunderland, SR2 7PT, UK. Roz.Crawley@sunderland.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-2321-463X
Susan AyersCentre for Maternal and Child Health Research, City, University of London, London, EC1V 0HB, UK.
Susan ButtonDepartment of Adult Nursing and Paramedic Science, University of Greenwich, London, SE9 2UG, UK.
Alexandra ThorntonCentre for Maternal and Child Health Research, City, University of London, London, EC1V 0HB, UK.
Andy P FieldSchool of Psychology, University of Sussex, Brighton, BN1 9QH, UK.
Suzanne LeeCentre for Maternal and Child Health Research, City, University of London, London, EC1V 0HB, UK.
Andrew EagleCentral and North West London NHS Foundation Trust, London, W10 6DZ, UK.
Robert BradleyBrighton and Sussex University Hospital NHS Trust, Eastern Road, Brighton, BN2 5BE, UK.
Donna MooreDepartment of Adult Nursing and Paramedic Science, University of Greenwich, London, SE9 2UG, UK.
Gill GyteNational Childbirth Trust, 30 Euston Square, London, NW1 2FB, UK.
Helen SmithDivision of Public Health and Primary Care, Brighton and Sussex Medical School, Brighton, BN1 9PH, UK.

Funding

Department of Health PB-PG-0211-24096Research for Patient Benefit Programme PB-PG-0211-24096
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPregnancy, birth and adjusting to a new baby is a potentially stressful time that can negatively affect women's mental and physical health. Expressive writing, where people write about a stressful event for at least 15 min on three consecutive days, has been associated with improved health in some groups but it is not clear whether it is feasible and acceptable for use with postpartum women. This study therefore examined the feasibility and acceptability of expressive writing for postpartum women as part of a randomised controlled trial (RCT).

methodsThe Health After Birth Trial (HABiT) was an RCT evaluating expressive writing for postpartum women which included measures of feasibility and acceptability. At 6 to 12 weeks after birth 854 women were randomised to expressive writing, a control writing task or normal care, and outcome measures of health were measured at baseline, one month later and six months later. Feasibility was measured by recruitment, attrition, and adherence to the intervention. Quantitative and qualitative measures of acceptability of the materials and the task were completed six months after the intervention.

resultsRecruitment was low (10.7% of those invited to participate) and the recruited sample was from a restricted sociodemographic range. Attrition was high, increased as the study progressed (35.8% at baseline, 57.5% at one month, and 68.1% at six months) and was higher in the writing groups than in the normal care group. Women complied with instructions to write expressively or not, but adherence to the instruction to write for 15 min per day for three days was low (Expressive writing: 29.3%; Control writing: 23.5%). Acceptability measures showed that women who wrote expressively rated the materials/task both more positively and more negatively than those in the control writing group, and qualitative comments revealed that women enjoyed the writing and/or found it helpful even when it was upsetting.

conclusionsThe feasibility of offering expressive writing as a universal self-help intervention to all postpartum women 6 to 12 weeks after birth in the HABiT trial was low, but the expressive writing intervention was acceptable to the majority of women who completed it.

trial registrationISRCTN58399513, 10/09/2013.

Indexed as

WritingAdultEmotionsFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansPatient Acceptance of Health CarePostnatal CarePostpartum PeriodPregnancyAcceptabilityExpressive writingFeasibilityMaternalPostnatalPostpartum

Identifiers

PMID29580213
PMCPMC5870252

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.