ArticleMedicine2020
Non-pharmacological interventions for postpartum depression: A protocol for systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Article in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effect of different physical activity interventions on perinatal depression: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.BMC public health · 2024Pooled it
- Clinical and Behavioral Outcomes During 4 Weeks of Home-Based Self-Administered Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Perinatal Women With Depressive Symptoms: Open-Label Exploratory Pilot Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- In the Shadows of Motherhood: A Comprehensive Review of Postpartum Depression Screening and Intervention Practices.Cureus · 2024Review
- The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Level of Physical Activity, Emotional State, and Health Habits of Women in Late Pregnancy and Early Puerperium.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Prevalence and associated risk factors of postpartum depression in India: A comprehensive review.Journal of neurosciences in rural practiceReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPostpartum depression (PPD) is one of the most common mental disorders in women following childbirth with heightened prevalence across the globe. Both pharmacotherapy and non-pharmacological interventions are effective for PPD. However, due to the concerns about the side effect on the mother and child of pharmacological treatments, most of women with PPD choose non-pharmacological therapies as their first line option. Prescription of these non-drug approaches should be guided by high quality evidence. Therefore, this network meta-analysis aims to compare, rank and interpret existed non-pharmacological evidence for the effective treatment of women with PPD.
methodsElectronic bibliographic databases including EMBASE, PubMed, Scopus, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI),VIP Database, Wanfang Database and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database will be searched for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of non-pharmacological interventions for PPD. Heterogeneity and inconsistencies will be analyzed by I statistic and Z test, respectively. We will assess the quality of evidence by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) and evaluate the risk of bias according to Cochrane risk of bias tool. R software 3.6.1 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria) will be used to conduct a network meta-analysis.
resultsFormal ethical approval is not required, because the present study is a meta-analysis based on existed studies. The findings of this research will be reported in a recognized journal.
conclusionThe review results will ascertain the hierarchy of effectiveness of different non-pharmacological approaches for PPD, and systematically provide suggests for physicians and patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42020166801.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.