Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33794828›Full record

SynthesisBMC pregnancy and childbirth2021

Universal prevention of distress aimed at pregnant women: a systematic review and meta-analysis of psychological interventions.

Marjolein Missler, Tara Donker, Roseriet Beijers, Marketa Ciharova, Charlotte Moyse, Ralph de Vries, Jaap Denissen, Annemieke van Straten

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Marjolein MisslerDepartment of Clinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology & Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Van der Boechorststraat 7, 1081, BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. m.a.missler@vu.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6644-382X
Tara DonkerDepartment of Clinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology & Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Van der Boechorststraat 7, 1081, BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Roseriet BeijersRadboud University, Behavioural Science Institute, Montessorilaan 3, 6525, HR, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Marketa CiharovaDepartment of Clinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology & Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Van der Boechorststraat 7, 1081, BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Charlotte MoyseDepartment of Clinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology & Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Van der Boechorststraat 7, 1081, BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Ralph de VriesVrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Medical Library, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081, HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Jaap DenissenDepartment of Developmental Psychology, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 1, 3584, CS, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Annemieke van StratenDepartment of Clinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology & Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Van der Boechorststraat 7, 1081, BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NLRadboud University Nijmegen · NLUniversity of Freiburg · DEUtrecht University · NL

Funding

Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek 406.14.106
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is sufficient meta-analytic evidence that antenatal interventions for women at risk (selective prevention) or for women with severe psychological symptoms (indicated prevention) are effective in reducing postpartum distress. However, women without risk or severe psychological symptoms might also experience distress. This meta-analysis focused on the effectiveness of preventive psychological interventions offered to universal populations of pregnant women on symptoms of depression, anxiety, and general stress. Paternal and infant outcomes were also included.

methodWe included 12 universal prevention studies in the meta-analysis, incorporating a total of 2559 pregnant women.

resultsOverall, ten studies included depression as an outcome measure, five studies included stress, and four studies anxiety. There was a moderate effect of preventive interventions implemented during pregnancy on the combined measure of maternal distress (d = .52), on depressive symptoms (d = .50), and on stress (d = .52). The effect on anxiety (d = .30) was smaller. The effects were not associated with intervention timing, intervention type, intervention delivery mode, timing of post-test, and methodological quality. The number of studies including partner and/or infant outcomes was too low to assess their effectiveness.

conclusionsThis meta-analysis suggests that universal prevention during pregnancy is effective on decreasing symptoms of maternal distress compared to routine care, at least with regard to depression. While promising, the results with regard to anxiety and stress are based on a considerably lower number of studies, and should thus be interpreted with caution. More research is needed on preventing other types of maternal distress beyond depression. Furthermore, there is a lack of research with regard to paternal distress. Also, given the large variety in interventions, more research is needed on which elements of universal prevention work. Finally, as maternal distress symptoms can affect infant development, it is important to investigate whether the positive effects of the preventive interventions extend from mother to infant. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: International prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) registration number: CRD42018098861.

Indexed as

Psychological DistressAnxietyDepressionFemaleHumansMothersPregnancyPregnancy ComplicationsPsychosocial InterventionRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicStress, PsychologicalTreatment OutcomeMaternal distressPregnant womenPsychological interventionsUniversal prevention

Identifiers

PMID33794828
PMCPMC8017784
OpenAlexW3139914012

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.