Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32372299›Full record

ArticleArchives of women's mental health2021

Perinatal depression screening practices in a large health system: identifying current state and assessing opportunities to provide more equitable care.

Abbey Sidebottom, Marc Vacquier, Elizabeth LaRusso, Darin Erickson, Rachel Hardeman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of women's mental health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 75 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
75citing papers in PubMed, 4 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.

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

75 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Diversity, equity, and inclusion considerations for anti-racist, equity-focused NICU family mental health.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2026
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

15 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors.

Abbey SidebottomCare Delivery Research, Allina Health, 800 E 28th Street, MR 15521, Minneapolis, MN, USA. abbey.sidebottom@allina.com.
Marc VacquierCare Delivery Research, Allina Health, 800 E 28th Street, MR 15521, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Elizabeth LaRussoMental Health Clinic, Allina Health, 800 E 28th Street, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Darin EricksonDivision of Epidemiology and Community Health, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, 1300 S 2nd St, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Rachel HardemanDivision of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, 420 Delaware St SE, Minneapolis, MN, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to assess the prevalence of prenatal and postpartum depression screening in a large health system and to identify covariates for screening, with a specific focus in understanding disparities in practice. A retrospective cohort of women with deliveries in 2016 was created using electronic health records. Primary outcomes were depression screening during pregnancy and the first 3 months postpartum. Generalized linear mixed models with women nested within clinic were used to determine the effect of maternal and clinical characteristics on depression screening. The sample included 7548 women who received prenatal care at 35 clinics and delivered at 10 hospitals. The postpartum sample included 7059 women who returned within 3 months for a postpartum visit. Of those, 65.1% were screened for depression during pregnancy, and 64.4% were screened postpartum. Clinic site was the strongest predictor of screening, accounting for 23-30% of the variability in screening prevalence. There were no disparities identified with regard to prenatal screening. However, several disparities were identified for postpartum screening. After adjusting for clinic, women who were African American, Asian, and otherwise non-white (Native American, multi-racial) were less likely to be screened postpartum than white women (AOR (CI)'s 0.81 (0.65, 1.01), 0.64 (0.53, 0.77), and 0.44 (0.21, 0.96), respectively). Women insured by Medicaid/Medicare, a proxy for low-income, were less likely to be screened postpartum than women who were privately insured (AOR (CI) 0.78 (0.68, 0.89)). National guidelines support universal depression screening of pregnant and postpartum women. The current study found opportunities for improvement in order to achieve universal screening and to deliver equitable care.

Indexed as

DepressionDepression, PostpartumAgedFemaleHumansMedicarePregnancyPrenatal CareRetrospective StudiesUnited StatesDisparitiesPostpartum depressionPrenatal depressionScreening

Identifiers

PMID32372299
PMCPMC7929950

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.