Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40689271›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in health services2025

Implementation of singing groups for postnatal depression: experiences of participants and professional stakeholders in the SHAPER-PND randomised controlled trial.

Emeline Han, Rachel Davis, Tayana Soukup, Alexandra Bradbury, Julie Williams, Maria Baldellou Lopez, Lorna Greenwood, Rebecca Bind, Carolina Estevao, Tim Osborn and 14 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in health services, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04834622 (Community Singing Interventions for Postnatal Depression), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT04834622 naunknown statusnot on this map

Community Singing Interventions for Postnatal Depression: a Hybrid Type II Effectiveness-implementation Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorKing's College LondonRan2021 to 2023Enrolled400ConditionsPostnatal DepressionArmsMelodies for Mums, Control Community Sessions
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Trial
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

24 authors.

Emeline HanDepartment of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Rachel DavisCentre for Implementation Science, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Tayana SoukupCentre for Implementation Science, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Alexandra BradburyDepartment of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Julie WilliamsCentre for Implementation Science, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Maria Baldellou LopezCentre for Implementation Science, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Lorna GreenwoodBreathe Arts Health Research, London, United Kingdom.
Rebecca BindDepartment of Psychological Medicine, King's College London, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, London, United Kingdom.
Carolina EstevaoDepartment of Psychological Medicine, King's College London, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, London, United Kingdom.
Tim OsbornBreathe Arts Health Research, London, United Kingdom.
Hannah DyeBreathe Arts Health Research, London, United Kingdom.
Kristi PriestleyDepartment of Psychological Medicine, King's College London, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, London, United Kingdom.
Lavinia RebecchiniDepartment of Psychological Medicine, King's College London, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, London, United Kingdom.
Katie HazelgroveDepartment of Psychological Medicine, King's College London, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, London, United Kingdom.
Manomani ManoharanSouth London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.
Anthony WoodsDepartment of Psychological Medicine, King's College London, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, London, United Kingdom.
Nikki CraneCulture Team, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Andy HealeyCentre for Implementation Science, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Paola DazzanDepartment of Psychological Medicine, King's College London, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, London, United Kingdom.
Nick SevdalisCentre for Behavioural and Implementation Science Interventions, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Carmine M ParianteDepartment of Psychological Medicine, King's College London, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, London, United Kingdom.
Daisy FancourtDepartment of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Ioannis BakolisCentre for Implementation Science, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Alexandra BurtonDepartment of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: There is a rapidly growing evidence base for the effectiveness of creative health interventions in improving mental health, but few studies have explored implementation and scaling of these interventions. The aim of this study was to evaluate the perceived acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility of a ten-week singing group programme (Breathe Melodies for Mums (M4M)) for mothers experiencing symptoms of postnatal depression (PND) and their babies as well as the programme ingredients that affected these implementation outcomes. Methods: A mixed methods design was adopted. Quantitative data was collected via the Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM), Intervention Appropriateness Measure (IAM), and Feasibility of Intervention Measure (FIM) from 109 intervention participants at 6, 20, and 36 weeks and analysed descriptively. Qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with 22 programme participants and 15 professional stakeholders involved in implementing the programme. Qualitative data were analysed using framework analysis. Results: Quantitative results showed high levels of acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility among M4M participants, with median scores of 5/5 achieved on the AIM, IAM and FIM at 20 and 36-week follow up. Qualitative results gave insights into the ingredients of M4M that made the programme acceptable, appropriate, and feasible to participants and professional stakeholders. These included "project" ingredients (dose, design, content), "people" ingredients (social composition, activity facilitation), and to a lesser extent, "context" ingredients (setting, project set-up). While participant and stakeholder experiences were largely positive, some challenges and suggestions for improvement were also identified, including broadening recruitment strategies to reach more women. Conclusion: M4M was highly acceptable, appropriate, and feasible to participants and stakeholders. By identifying the "core" ingredients that facilitated implementation success and strategies to address implementation barriers, these findings have important implications for future implementation and scale-up of M4M and similar creative health programmes. Clinical Trial Registration: identifier (NCT04834622).

Indexed as

arts in healthcreative health interventionsgroup singingimplementation outcomespostnatal depression

Identifiers

PMID40689271
PMCPMC12271174

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.