Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32033547›Full record

ArticleBMC psychiatry2020

Decision-making about antidepressant medication use in pregnancy: a comparison between women making the decision in the preconception period versus in pregnancy.

Lucy C Barker, Cindy-Lee Dennis, Neesha Hussain-Shamsy, Donna E Stewart, Sophie Grigoriadis, Kelly Metcalfe, Tim F Oberlander, Carrie Schram, Valerie H Taylor, Simone N Vigod

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC psychiatry, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Making decisions about antidepressant use during pregnancy: a qualitative interview study of a sample of women in the UK.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. 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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Lucy C BarkerDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, M5T 1R8, Canada.
Cindy-Lee DennisDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, M5T 1R8, Canada.
Neesha Hussain-ShamsyDepartment of Psychiatry, Women's College Hospital and Research Institute, Toronto, Ontario, 76 Grenville street Rm. 7234, Toronto, ON, M5S 1B2, Canada.
Donna E StewartDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, M5T 1R8, Canada.
Sophie GrigoriadisDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, M5T 1R8, Canada.
Kelly MetcalfeLawrence S. Bloomberg Faculty of Nursing, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, M5T 1P8, Canada.
Tim F OberlanderDepartment of Pediatrics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, V6H 3V4, Canada.
Carrie SchramDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 1V7, Canada.
Valerie H TaylorDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, M5T 1R8, Canada.
Simone N VigodDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, M5T 1R8, Canada. simone.vigod@wchospital.ca.
University of Toronto · CAWomen's College Hospital · CASunnybrook Health Science Centre · CAUniversity of British Columbia · CA

Funding

CIHR FRN-133662
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDecisions about antidepressant use in pregnancy are complex. Little is known about how pregnancy-planning and already pregnant women making these decisions differ.

methodsIn 95 Canadian women having difficulty deciding whether to take antidepressants in pregnancy, we compared sociodemographic factors, clinical characteristics, and treatment intent between women planning pregnancy (preconception women) and currently-pregnant women.

resultsAbout 90% of preconception women (n = 55) were married or cohabitating and university-educated, and over 60% had an annual income of > 80,000 CAD/year; this was not different from currently-pregnant women (n = 40). Almost all women had previously used antidepressants, but preconception women were more likely to report current use (85.5% vs. 45.0%). They were more likely to have high decisional conflict (83.6% vs. 60.0%) and less likely to be under the care of a psychiatrist (29.1% vs. 52.5%). Preconception women were more likely than pregnant women to report the intent to use antidepressants (60% vs. 32.5%, odds ratio 3.11, 95% confidence interval 1.33-7.32); this was partially explained by between-group differences in current antidepressant use.

conclusionsPreconception women were more likely than pregnant women to intend to use antidepressants in pregnancy, in part because more of them were already using this treatment. Strategies to enhance support for decision-making about antidepressant medication use in pregnancy may need to be tailored differently for pregnancy-planning and already pregnant women.

Indexed as

Decision MakingDepressionPregnancy ComplicationsAdultAntidepressive AgentsCanadaFemaleHumansMedication Therapy ManagementPreconception CarePregnancyPregnant PeoplePrenatal CareSocioeconomic FactorsAntidepressive AgentsAntidepressant medicationsDecision makingPerinatal depressionPreconceptionPregnancy

Identifiers

PMID32033547
PMCPMC7007680
OpenAlexW3005619272

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.