Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36101654›Full record

ArticlePsychiatric research and clinical practice2021

A Non-Randomized Trial of In-Person Versus Text/Telephone Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment for Pregnant and Postpartum Women.

Constance Guille, Lizmarie Maldonado, Annie N Simpson, Roger Newman, Courtney King, Bernadette Cortese, Erin Quigley, Nicole Dietrich, Anna Kerr, Rubin Aujla and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychiatric research and clinical practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Can Social Work Interventions Improve Perinatal Mental Health Outcomes? A Systematic Review.Women's health issues : official publication of the Jacobs Institute of Women's Health
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Informatics Interventions for Maternal Morbidity: Scoping Review.Interactive journal of medical research · 2025
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. 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

13 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Constance GuilleDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences Medical University of South Carolina Charleston.
Lizmarie MaldonadoDepartment of Healthcare Leadership and Management Medical University of South Carolina Charleston.
Annie N SimpsonDepartment of Healthcare Leadership and Management Medical University of South Carolina Charleston.
Roger NewmanDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology Medical University of South Carolina Charleston.
Courtney KingDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences Medical University of South Carolina Charleston.
Bernadette CorteseDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences Medical University of South Carolina Charleston.
Erin QuigleyBiomedical Informatics Center Medical University of South Carolina Charleston.
Nicole DietrichDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences Medical University of South Carolina Charleston.
Anna KerrDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology Medical University of South Carolina Charleston.
Rubin AujlaDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences Medical University of South Carolina Charleston.
Kathryn KingDepartment of Pediatrics Medical University of South Carolina Charleston.
Dee FordDepartment of Pulmonology Medical University of South Carolina Charleston SC.
Kathleen T BradyDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences Medical University of South Carolina Charleston.
Medical University of South Carolina · US

Funding

South Carolina Clinical & Translational Research Institute (SCTR)UL1TR001450 · NCATS · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI BRADY, KATHLEEN T., FLUME, PATRICK A · 2015 to 2024
$41.1M
Southern Consortium Node of the Clinical Trials NetworkU10DA013727 · NIDA · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI BRADY, KATHLEEN T. · 2000 to 2015
$34.4M
Southern Consortium Node of the Clinical Trials Network (Varenicline)UG1DA013727 · NIDA · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI KATHLEEN T. BRADY, Kelly S. Barth · 2015 to 2026
$24.8M
The Impact of Stress and Craving on Return to Postpartum Cannabis UseU54DA016511 · NIDA · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI CONSTANCE GUILLE · 2018 to 2026
$15.9M
Web-Based Treatment for Perinatal Opioid Use DisorderR34DA046730 · NIDA · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI GUILLE, CONSTANCE · 2019 to 2020
$899k
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001450NIDA NIH HHS R34 DA046730NIDA NIH HHS U10 DA013727NIDA NIH HHS U54 DA016511NIDA NIH HHS UG1 DA013727
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Systems of care that improve mental health and substance use disorder Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) for pregnant and postpartum women are needed. Aims: The aim of this study is to determine if women receiving prenatal care from January 2020 to April 2021 are more likely to be screened, screen positive, be referred for treatment and attend treatment with technology facilitated SBIRT, compared to women receiving prenatal care and in-person SBIRT January 2017 to December 2019. Materials & Methods: Technology facilitated SBIRT, designated Listening to Women (LTW), includes text message-based screening, phone-based brief intervention, and referral to treatment by a remote care coordinator. A total of 3535 pregnant and postpartum women were included in the quasi-experimental study and data were collected via text message and Electronic Health Record. Results: In-person SBIRT was completed by 65.2% (1947/2988) of women while 98.9% (547/553) of women approached agreed to take part in LTW and 71.9% (393/547) completed SBIRT via LTW. After controlling for potentially confounding variables, women enrolled in LTW were significantly more likely to be screened (relative risk [RR]: 1.10, 95% CI 1.03-1.16), screen positive (RR 1.91, 95% CI 1.72-2.10), referred to treatment (RR 1.55, 95% CI 1.43-1.69) and receive treatment (RR 4.95, 95% CI 3.93-6.23), compared to women receiving in-person SBIRT. Black women enrolled in LTW were significantly more likely to screen positive (RR 1.65, 95% CI 1.35-2.01), be referred to treatment (RR 1.54, 95% CI 1.35-1.76) and attend treatment (RR 5.49, 95% CI 3.69-8.17), compared to Black women receiving in-person SBIRT. Discussion: LTW appears to increase the proportion of pregnant and postpartum women receiving key elements of SBIRT.

Identifiers

PMID36101654
PMCPMC9175992
OpenAlexW3211483037

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.