ArticleApplied health economics and health policy2025
Cost-Effectiveness of Perinatal Depression Screening: A Scoping Review.
Article in Applied health economics and health policy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Salivary oxytocin responses to infant stimuli vary by EPDS scores among postpartum Japanese mothers without clinically diagnosed postpartum depression.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivePerinatal depression (PND) has emerged as a significant public health concern. There is no consensus among countries or organizations on whether to screen for PND. Despite the growing body of evidence regarding the economic value of PND screening, its cost-effectiveness remains inadequately understood due to the heterogeneity of existing studies. This study aims to synthesize the available global evidence on the cost-effectiveness of PND screening compared to routine or usual care to provide a clearer understanding of its economic value.
methodsA detailed search strategy was predetermined to identify peer-reviewed publications that evaluated the cost-effectiveness of PND screening. We designed a scoping literature review protocol and searched electronic databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science, for studies published from inception to 10 December 2023. We included studies that conducted full economic evaluations comparing PND screening with usual care or other comparators and excluded studies that were not in English or lacked full texts. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist was used to evaluate the reporting quality of the studies. Then, the data regarding costs and effectiveness were extracted and summarized narratively.
resultsA total of ten eligible studies were included, all of which were evaluated as being of high reporting quality. Nine of these studies compared the economic value of PND screening with usual care without screening, with eight finding that PND screening was generally more cost-effective. The remaining study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of two psychosocial assessment models and indicated that both effectively identified women "at risk". Across studies, PND screening ranged from being dominant (cheaper and more effective than usual care without screening) to costing USD 17,644 per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Most included studies used decision trees or Markov models to test if PND screening was cost-effective. Although current economic evaluation studies have mostly suggested PND screening could be more cost-effective than usual care without screening, there is high heterogeneity in terms of participants, screening strategies, screening settings, and perspectives across studies.
conclusionsDespite varied settings and designs, most studies consistently indicate PND screening as cost-effective. Further evidence is also required from low- and middle-income countries (LMIC), non-Western countries, and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to draw a more robust conclusion.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39460885What 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.