ArticleBMC psychiatry2026
Barriers to accessing treatment in perinatal depression: a qualitative and quantitative study.
Article in BMC psychiatry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimThis study aims to identify culture and region-specific barriers to seeking treatment in women at risk for depression during the perinatal period, which may have been previously overlooked. MATERIALS VE
methodsThe study was conducted in two stages using both qualitative ve quantitative methods. Participants included women who were screened for depression risk using the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) at the gynecology ve obstetrics clinic of Sakarya Training ve Research Hospital between January and December 2022. Women identified as at risk for depression and referred to the perinatal psychiatry outpatient clinic but who did not seek treatment were included. In the qualitative stage, 20 participants completed a sociodemographic data form ve the EPDS, followed by a qualitative interview. The qualitative component was conducted and reported in accordance with the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ). In the quantitative stage, 66 participants were administered a sociodemographic data form, the EPDS and a quantitative questionnaire developed based on the qualitative findings.
resultsThe qualitative analysis revealed five themes: individual factors, environmental factors, sociocultural factors, stigma-related factors, and clinical factors. In the quantitative analysis, the top three barriers identified were: “the societal expectation that household chores such as cleaning, ironing, cooking, ve childcare are women’s responsibilities”, “the burden of these household tasks,” and “the prioritization of daily life responsibilities over mental health concerns.” A positive correlation was found between the EPDS scores and the following questionnaire items: “lack of a safe place to leave the child”, “mental health issues perceived as unimportant by close contacts”, “the burden of household tasks”, “the prioritization of daily life responsibilities over mental health concerns”, “the societal expectation of women’s responsibility for household chores” and “lack of support or indifference from a partner during pregnancy and the postpartum period.“.
conclusionIn the qualitative phase, five themes emerged: individual factors, environmental factors, sociocultural factors, stigma-related factors and health provider-related factors. In the quantitative phase, the three highest-scoring questions were primarily related to sociocultural factors. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.