Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35421171›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Psychological health of pregnant and postpartum women before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Yvonne J Kuipers, Roxanne Bleijenbergh, Laura Van den Branden, Yannic van Gils, Sophie Rimaux, Charlotte Brosens, Astrid Claerbout, Eveline Mestdagh

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
4.2field-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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Emotional wellbeing of student midwives during COVID-19.Women and birth : journal of the Australian College of Midwives · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. The Correlation of Frequency of Work-Related Disorders with Type of Work among Polish Employees.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Yvonne J KuipersDepartment of Health and Social Care, School of Midwifery, AP University College, Antwerp, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-4200-0522
Roxanne BleijenberghDepartment of Health and Social Care, School of Midwifery, AP University College, Antwerp, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-6534-7169
Laura Van den BrandenDepartment of Health and Social Care, School of Midwifery, AP University College, Antwerp, Belgium.
Yannic van GilsDepartment of Health and Social Care, School of Midwifery, AP University College, Antwerp, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-7917-4684
Sophie RimauxDepartment of Health and Social Care, School of Midwifery, AP University College, Antwerp, Belgium.
Charlotte BrosensDepartment of Health and Social Care, School of Midwifery, AP University College, Antwerp, Belgium.
Astrid ClaerboutDepartment of Health and Social Care, School of Midwifery, AP University College, Antwerp, Belgium.
Eveline MestdaghDepartment of Health and Social Care, School of Midwifery, AP University College, Antwerp, Belgium.
University of Antwerp · BEEdinburgh Napier University · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic is likely to influence psychological health of pregnant and postpartum women.

methodsWe conducted a non-concurrent cross-sectional study among 1145 women living in the Dutch-speaking part of Belgium, 541 pregnant and 604 postpartum women. We measured psychological health with the Whooley questions, Generalized Anxiety Disorder 2-item (GAD-2) and the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) and compared the scores of pregnant and postpartum women before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

resultsNo differences were observed in the Whooley, GAD-2 or EPDS scores among pregnant women. The postpartum total GAD-2 scores before vs during the pandemic showed significant differences. Controlling for confounders, we observed a small main positive effect of having an infant during time of COVID-19 (F(1.13) = 5.06, p.025, d.27). The effect was significantly larger for women with (a history of) perinatal psychological problems (F(1.12) = 51.44, p < .001, d.82). Emotional support was significantly related to GAD-2 scores of postpartum women during the pandemic (F(1.90) = 35.54, p < .001). Postpartum women reported significant higher effects of the pandemic on their behavior compared to pregnant women (p.034).

conclusionThe COVID-19 pandemic seems to have a positive effect on postpartum women during the first year postpartum, in particular for women with (a history of) perinatal psychological problems and for those women who experienced emotional support. The findings suggest that less external stimuli caused by lockdown restrictions might have a positive effect on postpartum women's emotional wellbeing. The sample consisted of white, educated women in a relationship and information regarding the extent of exposure to adverse COVID-19 consequences was lacking. We relied on self-selection and self-report. The postpartum pandemic sample was small.

Indexed as

COVID-19Depression, PostpartumCommunicable Disease ControlCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansPandemicsParturitionPostpartum PeriodPregnancyPregnant People

Identifiers

PMID35421171
PMCPMC9009654
OpenAlexW4224140900

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.