ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2025
Psychometric evaluation of the Japanese Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale for screening postpartum anxiety.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 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.
- Associations of Perceived Parenting Practices with Mother-Infant Bonding at 1-Month Postpartum via Adult Attachment, Depression, and Anxiety in Japanese Mothers.Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Despite the acknowledged importance of addressing postpartum anxiety alongside postpartum depression, standardized screening tools specifically developed for this purpose remain limited. Objective: This study aimed to validate the anxiety factor of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) and to determine optimal cutoff scores for screening postpartum anxiety. Methods: EPDS and the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) were collected from 100 Japanese women at one month postpartum at Niigata University Medical and Dental Hospital between May 18, 2021, and December 28, 2022, using random convenience and purposive sampling. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted on data from 84 participants to test six previously proposed EPDS factor models, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed on data from 83 participants to determine area under the curve (AUC) values and cutoff scores. The EPDS anxiety subscales with three items (EPDS-3A) and four items (EPDS-4A) were separately evaluated as predictor variables, with STAI state and trait anxiety as criterion measures. We assessed accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity. Results: All models with two-factor and three-factor showed a good fit to the data, with two models with EPDS-3A being superior among other models (comparative fit index = 1.000, root mean square error of approximation = 0.001). ROC analyses indicated good testing accuracy of the EPDS anxiety subscales for detecting both state and trait anxiety. For EPDS-3A, the AUCs were 0.832 (95% CI 0.735-0.930) for state anxiety with an optimal cutoff of ≥3 (sensitivity 79.2%, specificity 79.7%), and 0.912 (95% CI 0.837-0.988) for trait anxiety with an optimal cutoff of ≥4 (sensitivity 82.4%, specificity 84.8%). For EPDS-4A, the AUCs were 0.833 (95% CI 0.736-0.930) for state anxiety with an optimal cutoff of ≥4 (sensitivity 79.2%, specificity 71.2%), and 0.935 (95% CI 0.867-1.000) for trait anxiety with an optimal cutoff of ≥5 (sensitivity 88.2%, specificity 87.9%). Conclusion: Both the EPDS-3A and EPDS-4A demonstrated good model fit and screening accuracy for anxiety at one month postpartum. Integrating anxiety screening into routine postpartum care may improve maternal mental health outcomes. Future studies involving clinical settings and larger cohort studies are recommended to improve external validity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.