Cited by 103Maternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and PostpartumPregnancy-related medical researchPersonality Disorders and Psychopathology

Psychological treatment of perinatal depression: a meta-analysis

Open access
Cuijpers, Pim, Franco, Pamela, Ciharova, Marketa, Miguel, Clara, Segre, Lisa, Quero, Soledad, Karyotaki, Eirini·2023·Psychological Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Depression during pregnancy and after the birth of a child is highly prevalent and an important public health problem. Psychological interventions are the first-line treatment and, although a considerable number of randomized trials have been conducted, no recent comprehensive meta-analysis has evaluated treatment effects. METHODS: We used an existing database of randomized controlled trials of psychotherapies for adult depression and included studies aimed at perinatal depression. Random effects models were used in all analyses. We examined the effects of the interventions in the short and long term, and also examined secondary outcomes. RESULTS: = 80%; 95% CI 75~85). This effect size remained largely unchanged and significant in a series of sensitivity analyses, although some publication bias was found. The effects remained significant at 6-12 months follow-up. Significant effects were also found for social support, anxiety, functional limitations, parental stress and marital stress, although the number of studies for each outcome was low. All results should be considered with caution because of the high levels of heterogeneity in most analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Psychological interventions are probably effective in the treatment of perinatal depression, with effects that last at least up to 6-12 months and probably also have effects on social support, anxiety, functional impairment, parental stress, and marital stress.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0033291721004529

Cites

111 of 111 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A significant portion of women do not respond to treatment for PMADs (~10-40% do not see improvements in depression).

    “Second, a significant portion of women do not respond to treatment (~10–40% do not see improvements in depression) [18].”

    From Acceptance-based process variables on postpartum well-being and distress: The mediating role of psychological flexibility (2024) · cites this paper as [18]

    The Results section, Table 2, reports average treatment effects and numbers needed to treat, not the proportion of women whose depression does not improve. The Methods section uses an assumed control-group response rate to calculate those numbers; it does not establish the claimed 10–40% nonresponse rate. Searches for nonresponse and improvement rates found no passage supporting that figure. (LLM, conf=0.75)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Beck, A. T., Steer, R. A., & Brown, G. K. (1996). BDI-II. Beck depression inventory second edition: Manual. San Antonio: Psychological Corporation.
  2. Cuijpers, P. (2020b). Psychological treatment of perinatal depression: A meta-analysis. Retrieved from osf.io/cmk4y. PMC10123831 37310303

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cuijpers, P., Franco, P., Ciharova, M., Miguel, C., Segre, L., Quero, S., & Karyotaki, E.
Affiliations
  • Amsterdam Public Health (NL)
  • Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile (CL)
  • University of Iowa (US)
  • Universitat Jaume I (ES)
Corresponding author
Cuijpers, Pim
Venue
Psychological Medicine
Published
2021-11-16
Volume
53
Issue
6
Pages
2596-2608
ISSN
  • 0033-2917 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8978
OpenAlex
W3212134895
Cited by
103
References
111
Citations by year
2026: 24 · 2025: 33 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 2
FWCI
2.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychological Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • VU Research Portal (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Repositori UJI (Universitat Jaume I) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
Chilean National Agency for Research and Development (ANID) / Scholarship Program (DOCTORADO NACIONAL/ 2019 – 21190745)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Maternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Pregnancy-related medical research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
Keywords
perinatal depression, psychological intervention, psychotherapy, treatment effectiveness, postpartum depression, pregnancy, social support, anxiety, functional disability, parental stress, marital stress, long-term outcomes
MeSH terms
Adult, Anxiety, Anxiety Disorders, Child, Depression, Depressive Disorder, Female, Humans, Pregnancy, Psychotherapy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review