The DOI matches its Crossref record; 41 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 33 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data
Open accessAbstract
Objective: To evaluate the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression in pregnant and postpartum women. Design: Individual participant data meta-analysis. Data sources: Medline, Medline In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, PsycINFO, and Web of Science (from inception to 3 October 2018). Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: Eligible datasets included EPDS scores and major depression classification based on validated diagnostic interviews. Bivariate random effects meta-analysis was used to estimate EPDS sensitivity and specificity compared with semi-structured, fully structured (Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) excluded), and MINI diagnostic interviews separately using individual participant data. One stage meta-regression was used to examine accuracy by reference standard categories and participant characteristics. Results: Individual participant data were obtained from 58 of 83 eligible studies (70%; 15 557 of 22 788 eligible participants (68%), 2069 with major depression). Combined sensitivity and specificity was maximised at a cut-off value of 11 or higher across reference standards. Among studies with a semi-structured interview (36 studies, 9066 participants, 1330 with major depression), sensitivity and specificity were 0.85 (95% confidence interval 0.79 to 0.90) and 0.84 (0.79 to 0.88) for a cut-off value of 10 or higher, 0.81 (0.75 to 0.87) and 0.88 (0.85 to 0.91) for a cut-off value of 11 or higher, and 0.66 (0.58 to 0.74) and 0.95 (0.92 to 0.96) for a cut-off value of 13 or higher, respectively. Accuracy was similar across reference standards and subgroups, including for pregnant and postpartum women. Conclusions: An EPDS cut-off value of 11 or higher maximised combined sensitivity and specificity; a cut-off value of 13 or higher was less sensitive but more specific. To identify pregnant and postpartum women with higher symptom levels, a cut-off of 13 or higher could be used. Lower cut-off values could be used if the intention is to avoid false negatives and identify most patients who meet diagnostic criteria. Registration: PROSPERO (CRD42015024785).
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
In an individual participant data meta-analysis, the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) maximised combined sensitivity and specificity at a cut-off of 11 or higher for detecting major depression in pregnant and postpartum women. Accuracy was similar across reference standards and subgroups, including pregnant versus postpartum status.
Key findings
- Among 58 included studies (15,557 participants; 2,069 with major depression), combined sensitivity and specificity was maximised at an EPDS cut-off of 11 or higher across reference standards (Youden’s J=0.70 for semi-structured, 0.73 for fully structured, 0.66 for MINI).
- For semi-structured interviews (36 studies, 9,066 participants, 1,330 with major depression), sensitivity and specificity were 0.85 (95% CI 0.79 to 0.90) and 0.84 (0.79 to 0.88) at ≥10; 0.81 (0.75 to 0.87) and 0.88 (0.85 to 0.91) at ≥11; and 0.66 (0.58 to 0.74) and 0.95 (0.92 to 0.96) at ≥13.
- Accuracy was similar across reference standards and subgroups, including pregnant and postpartum women; no other study or participant characteristics were consistently associated with differences in sensitivity or specificity across both semi-structured and MINI categories.
- For major depression prevalence of 5–25% and a cut-off of ≥11 compared with semi-structured interviews, positive predictive values ranged from 26% to 69% and negative predictive values from 93% to 99%.
Methods
- Individual participant data meta-analysis (PROSPERO CRD42015024785) of studies administering the EPDS and classifying major depression via validated semi-structured or fully structured diagnostic interviews, with EPDS and interview no more than two weeks apart, in adult women during pregnancy or within 12 months postpartum.
- Searched Medline, Medline In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, PsycINFO, and Web of Science from inception to 3 October 2018; obtained individual participant data from 58 of 83 eligible studies (70%; 15,557 of 22,788 eligible participants, 68%).
- Estimated sensitivity and specificity separately for semi-structured, fully structured (MINI excluded), and MINI reference standards using bivariate random effects models across cut-off values 7–15; used one-stage meta-regression to examine accuracy by reference standard categories and participant characteristics.
Limitations
- The paper states that data were not obtained from 25 of 83 published eligible datasets, moderate heterogeneity was found across studies, and subgroup analyses by cultural aspects, country or language, or specific pregnancy trimesters/postpartum periods could not be conducted because data were insufficient; few studies from low and middle income countries were included.
- The paper also states that while studies were categorised by interview administered, interviews might not always have been used as intended, and one third of studies were coded as unclear for interviewer qualification in risk of bias assessment.
- Evident from the text: the fully structured reference standard subgroup was very small (3 studies for sensitivity and 4 for specificity; 3,188 participants, 227 with major depression), and one study included only one participant with major depression; age <25 subgroup analyses excluded four semi-structured and four MINI studies with no participants with major depression.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
0 of 33 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Among studies with a semi-structured interview (36 studies, 9066 participants, 1330 with major depression), sensitivity and specificity were 0.85 (95% confidence interval 0.79 to 0.90) and 0.84 (0.79 to 0.88) for a cut-off value of 10 or higher, 0.81 (0.75 to 0.87) and 0.88 (0.85 to 0.91) for a cut-off value of 11 or higher, and 0.66 (0.58 to 0.74) and 0.95 (0.92 to 0.96) for a cut-off value of 13”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Abstract > Results
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Accuracy was similar across reference standards and subgroups, including for pregnant and postpartum women.”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Abstract > Results
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Among studies with a semi-structured interview (36 studies, 9066 participants, 1330 with major depression), sensitivity and specificity were 0.85 (95% confidence interval 0.79 to 0.90) and 0.84 (0.79 to 0.88) for a cut-off value of 10 or higher, 0.81 (0.75 to 0.87) and 0.88 (0.85 to 0.91) for a cut-off value of 11 or higher, and 0.66 (0.58 to 0.74) and 0.95 (0.92 to 0.96) for a cut-off value of 13”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Abstract > Results
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Individual participant data were obtained from 58 of 83 eligible studies (70%; 15 557 of 22 788 eligible participants (68%), 2069 with major depression).”
- Also stated in: § Search results and dataset inclusion · plain
“Authors of included studies contributed data from two other studies that the search did not retrieve for a total of 58 datasets (15 557 participants, 2069 with major depression).”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Abstract > Results
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedn = 557Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passes- Also stated in: § Search results and dataset inclusion · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Individual participant data were obtained from 58 of 83 eligible studies (70%; 15 557 of 22 788 eligible participants (68%), 2069 with major depression).”
- Also stated in: § Search results and dataset inclusion · plain
“Of 22 788 participants in 83 eligible published studies, 15 557 (68%) were included.”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Abstract > Results
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedn = 788Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passes- Also stated in: § Search results and dataset inclusion · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Among studies with a semi-structured interview (36 studies, 9066 participants, 1330 with major depression), sensitivity and specificity were 0.85 (95% confidence interval 0.79 to 0.90) and 0.84 (0.79 to 0.88) for a cut-off value of 10 or higher, 0.81 (0.75 to 0.87) and 0.88 (0.85 to 0.91) for a cut-off value of 11 or higher, and 0.66 (0.58 to 0.74) and 0.95 (0.92 to 0.96) for a cut-off value of 13”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Abstract > Results
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Among studies with a semi-structured interview (36 studies, 9066 participants, 1330 with major depression), sensitivity and specificity were 0.85 (95% confidence interval 0.79 to 0.90) and 0.84 (0.79 to 0.88) for a cut-off value of 10 or higher, 0.81 (0.75 to 0.87) and 0.88 (0.85 to 0.91) for a cut-off value of 11 or higher, and 0.66 (0.58 to 0.74) and 0.95 (0.92 to 0.96) for a cut-off value of 13”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Abstract > Results
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Among studies with a semi-structured interview (36 studies, 9066 participants, 1330 with major depression), sensitivity and specificity were 0.85 (95% confidence interval 0.79 to 0.90) and 0.84 (0.79 to 0.88) for a cut-off value of 10 or higher, 0.81 (0.75 to 0.87) and 0.88 (0.85 to 0.91) for a cut-off value of 11 or higher, and 0.66 (0.58 to 0.74) and 0.95 (0.92 to 0.96) for a cut-off value of 13”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Abstract > Results
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Individual participant data were obtained from 58 of 83 eligible studies (70%; 15 557 of 22 788 eligible participants (68%), 2069 with major depression).”
- Also stated in: § Search results and dataset inclusion · plain
“Authors of included studies contributed data from two other studies that the search did not retrieve for a total of 58 datasets (15 557 participants, 2069 with major depression).”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Abstract > Results
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passes- Also stated in: § Search results and dataset inclusion · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Among studies with a semi-structured interview (36 studies, 9066 participants, 1330 with major depression), sensitivity and specificity were 0.85 (95% confidence interval 0.79 to 0.90) and 0.84 (0.79 to 0.88) for a cut-off value of 10 or higher, 0.81 (0.75 to 0.87) and 0.88 (0.85 to 0.91) for a cut-off value of 11 or higher, and 0.66 (0.58 to 0.74) and 0.95 (0.92 to 0.96) for a cut-off value of 13”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Abstract > Results
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes
- It may state two separate claims as one. 27
- Probably not a substantial claim. 23
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Eligible studies that did and did not contribute data were generally similar in terms of sample size, proportion of participants with major depression (excluding non-contributing studies where number with major depression was not reported), and country human development index.”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Results > Search results and dataset inclusion
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thirty six studies used semi-structured reference standards, including 34 that used the SCID; four used fully structured reference standards (MINI excluded), including three that used the CIDI; and 18 used the MINI (table 1).”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Results > Search results and dataset inclusion
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Of 58 included studies, 25 included pregnant women, 30 postpartum women, and three both pregnant and postpartum women.”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Results > Search results and dataset inclusion
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Among studies with a semi-structured interview (36 studies, 9066 participants, 1330 with major depression), sensitivity and specificity were 0.85 (95% confidence interval 0.79 to 0.90) and 0.84 (0.79 to 0.88) for a cut-off value of 10 or higher, 0.81 (0.75 to 0.87) and 0.88 (0.85 to 0.91) for a cut-off value of 11 or higher, and 0.66 (0.58 to 0.74) and 0.95 (0.92 to 0.96) for a cut-off value of 13”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Abstract > Results
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedn = 1,330Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The proportion of studies with pregnant women only was also similar for contributing and non-contributing studies.”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Results > Search results and dataset inclusion
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Among both contributing and non-contributing studies, most studies used semi-structured interviews as the reference standard, followed by the MINI, and other fully structured interviews.”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Results > Search results and dataset inclusion
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“0.66 (0.58 to 0.74) and 0.95 (0.92 to 0.96) for a cut-off value of 13 or higher”
- Also stated in: § Principal findings · plain
“At cut-off values of 10 or higher and 13 or higher, which are commonly used for depression screening,13 sensitivity and specificity were 85% and 84%, and 66% and 95%, respectively.”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Results > EPDS sensitivity and specificity by reference standard category
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The EPDS is the most commonly used depression screening tool in perinatal care, with cut-off values of 10 or higher and 13 or higher typically used to identify women who might be depressed.
- Also stated in: § Principal findings · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For major depression prevalence values of 5-25% and a cut-off value of 11 or higher compared with semi-structured interviews, positive predictive values ranged from 26% to 69% and negative predictive values ranged from 93% to 99%.”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Results > EPDS sensitivity and specificity by reference standard category
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“0.81 (0.75 to 0.87) and 0.88 (0.85 to 0.91) for a cut-off value of 11 or higher”
- Also stated in: § Principal findings · plain
“sensitivity and specificity were 81% and 88% for a cut-off value of 11 or higher.”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Results > EPDS sensitivity and specificity by reference standard category
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § Principal findings · plain
In the paper
“Based on studies with a semi-structured reference standard, across cut-off values of 10-13, sensitivity estimates in the present IPDMA were 6-13% lower than those in the previous meta-analysis, whereas specificity estimates were 4-7% higher.”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Discussion > Comparison with other studies
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [13] source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We found no significant or substantive differences based on country human development index, but few studies from low and middle income countries were included.”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Discussion > Strengths and limitations
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For semi-structured interviews, sensitivity and specificity were 0.85 (95% confidence interval 0.79 to 0.90) and 0.84 (0.79 to 0.88) for a cut-off value of 10 or higher”
- Also stated in: § Principal findings · plain
“At cut-off values of 10 or higher and 13 or higher, which are commonly used for depression screening,13 sensitivity and specificity were 85% and 84%, and 66% and 95%, respectively.”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Results > EPDS sensitivity and specificity by reference standard category
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The EPDS is the most commonly used depression screening tool in perinatal care, with cut-off values of 10 or higher and 13 or higher typically used to identify women who might be depressed.
- Also stated in: § Principal findings · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Combined sensitivity and specificity was maximised at a cut-off value of 11 or higher for semi-structured interviews (Youden’s J=0.70), fully structured interviews (Youden’s J=0.73), and the MINI (Youden’s J=0.66).”
- Also stated in: § Principal findings · plain
“Our main finding was that combined sensitivity and specificity was maximised at a cut-off value of 11 or higher across reference standards.”
- Also stated in: § Conclusions · plain
“we found that combined sensitivity and specificity for the EPDS is maximised at a cut-off value of 11 or higher.”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Results > EPDS sensitivity and specificity by reference standard category
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § Principal findings · plain
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The systematic review conducted to support the USPSTF guideline reported the range of accuracy estimates for EPDS cut-off values of 10 or higher (14 studies) and 13 or higher (17 studies) in 23 primary studies, but did not include a meta-analysis.14 15”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [14] O’Connor E Rossom RC Henninger M . Screening for depression in adults: an updated systematic evidence review for the US Preventive Services Task Force: evidence synthesis No. 128. [AHRQ Publication No. 14-05208-EF-1] Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, 2016.
- Not checked yetcites [15] source
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“By design, fully structured interviews are intended to increase standardisation, but this could be at the cost of reduced validity.39 40 41 42”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Methods > Statistical analyses
What the sources say
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Two reviewers independently reviewed titles and abstracts. For publications deemed potentially eligible by either reviewer, a full text review was done by two reviewers, also independently. Any conflicts were resolved by consensus and a third reviewer was consulted if necessary.”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Methods > Database searches and study selection
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The 10 item EPDS is the most commonly used depression screening tool in perinatal care; cut-off values of 10 or higher and 13 or higher are most often used to identify women who might have depression.11 12 13 14 15”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Introduction
What the sources say
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“The USPSTF recommends screening pregnant and postpartum women with the EPDS, but does not specify a cut-off value.9”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [9] source
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“An existing meta-analysis that has examined EPDS screening accuracy searched databases through February 2007 and found that combined sensitivity and specificity to detect major depression in postpartum women was greater for a cut-off value of 12 or higher (sensitivity 0.86, specificity 0.87, 15 studies) than for a cut-off value of 10 or higher (sensitivity 0.92, specificity 0.77, 14 studies) or 13”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [13] source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The 10 item EPDS is the most commonly used depression screening tool in perinatal care; cut-off values of 10 or higher and 13 or higher are most often used to identify women who might have depression.11 12 13 14 15”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Introduction
What the sources say
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This IPDMA was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42015024785), a protocol was published,20 and the results were reported following PRISMA-DTA (preferred reporting items for a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies)21 and PRISMA-IPD (preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analyses of individual participant data)22 guidelines.”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Methods
What the sources say
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We verified that participant characteristics and accuracy results from individual datasets matched those that had been published. If any discrepancies were found, we worked with the primary study investigators to understand and resolve differences.”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Methods > Data contribution, extraction, and synthesis
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Therefore, the optimal cut-off value for screening remains unknown, and whether different cut-off values are needed for women with different characteristics needs to be determined.”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Introduction
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✗ Asserted: fails✗ Checkable: fails✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For analyses in the age less than 25 subgroup, we excluded four semi-structured studies and four MINI studies that did not have any participants with major depression because the bivariate random effects model could not be applied. Therefore, 21 participants (1%) younger than 25 were excluded from semi-structured studies, and 77 (9%) from MINI studies.”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Methods > Statistical analyses
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The MINI is a brief version of a fully structured interview that was designed for rapid administration and tends to be overinclusive.36”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Methods > Statistical analyses
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [36] source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“We analysed studies that used different types of reference standards separately because we previously found that, controlling for depressive symptom levels, the MINI might classify depression more than other diagnostic interviews, and the CIDI might classify more participants with low level symptoms as having depression but fewer with high level symptoms.16 17 18”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Methods > Statistical analyses
What the sources say
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“We used the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool (QUADAS-2; eMethods2)31 to assess risk of bias of included studies. Two investigators independently performed this assessment and any differences were resolved through consensus or by involving a third investigator if necessary.”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Methods > Risk of bias assessment
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [31] source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“An EPDS cut-off value of 11 or higher maximised combined sensitivity and specificity; a cut-off value of 13 or higher was less sensitive but more specific.”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Abstract > Conclusions
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Two investigators independently extracted information on the diagnostic interview administered and the country of study from the published reports.”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Methods > Data contribution, extraction, and synthesis
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“A medical librarian designed a peer reviewed29 search strategy (eMethods1 in supplementary material) and searched Medline, Medline In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, and PsycINFO through OvidSP, and Web of Science through ISI Web of Knowledge from inception to 3 October 2018.”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Methods > Database searches and study selection
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [29] McGowan J, Sampson M, Salzwedel DM, et al. PRESS – Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies: 2015 Guideline Explanation and Elaboration (PRESS E&E). CADTH. https://www.cadth.ca/sites/default/files/pdf/CP0015_PRESS_Update_Report_2016.pdf 2016 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“The results were not pooled for pregnant women because there were too few studies, and no subgroup analyses were conducted among postpartum women because primary studies did not report the necessary data.”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [13] source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No participants had missing data for any covariates in the meta-regressions.”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Methods > Statistical analyses
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Firstly, we did not obtain data from 25 of 83 published eligible datasets, although the results did not change when we incorporated published results from studies that did not contribute data but published eligible accuracy results.”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Discussion > Strengths and limitations
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Strengths include analysis of data from more than twice the number of studies compared with the previous conventional meta-analysis,13 and including results for all cut-off values from all studies.”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Discussion > Strengths and limitations
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [13] source
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The cut-off value of 11 or higher that maximised combined sensitivity and specificity in the present study is lower than both the most commonly used cut-off value of 13 or higher13 and the cut-off value of 12 or higher that maximised combined sensitivity and specificity in a previous EPDS accuracy meta-analysis.13”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Discussion > Comparison with other studies
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [13] source
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The EPDS is the most commonly used depression screening tool in perinatal care, with cut-off values of 10 or higher and 13 or higher typically used to identify women who might be depressed.
In the paper
“The previous meta-analysis did not pool results for pregnant women because too few studies were found, and no subgroup analyses were conducted among postpartum women because primary studies did not report the necessary data”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Conclusions > What is already known on this topic
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [13] source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“A previous meta-analysis of the screening accuracy of the EPDS, which was conducted more than 13 years ago, found that a cut-off value of 12 or higher maximised combined sensitivity and specificity in postpartum women (21 studies)”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Conclusions > What is already known on this topic
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [13] source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“one third of studies were coded as unclear for interviewer qualification in our risk of bias assessment.”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Discussion > Strengths and limitations
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Differences in results between the current IPDMA and the previous meta-analysis might have occurred because the current IPDMA consisted of 58 primary studies, including 36 with a semi-structured reference standard, versus 21 primary studies with various types of reference standards in the previous meta-analysis.”
§ Accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression among pregnant and postpartum women: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data > Discussion > Comparison with other studies
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [13] source
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper relies on this without support.
The EPDS is the most commonly used depression screening tool in perinatal care, with cut-off values of 10 or higher and 13 or higher typically used to identify women who might be depressed.
“The Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) is the most commonly used depression screening tool in perinatal care, with cut-off values of 10 or higher and 13 or higher typically used to identify women who might be depressed”
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Additionally, selection of this lower threshold score maximizes sensitivity of this screening tool to detect major depression [37].”
From Factors associated with postpartum depression symptoms following antepartum hospitalization (2026) · cites this paper as [37]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The most commonly used cut-off scores are ≥10 and ≥ 13 with sensitivity and specificity values of 85 % and 84 %, and 66 % and 95 %, respectively (Levis et al., 2020).”
From PandaMom – Feasibility and acceptability of an internet- and mobile-based intervention to enhance peripartum mental well-being and to prevent postpartum depression (2024) · cites this paper as Levis et al., 2020
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Conflicting counts of studies that did not contribute data
MinorThe results section says 26 eligible studies did not contribute individual participant data, but the limitations section says data were not obtained from 25 of 83 eligible datasets. The reported totals of 83 eligible and 58 included also leave 25 without data.
“eight of the 26 studies that did not contribute individual participant data”
“we did not obtain data from 25 of 83 published eligible datasets”
Citations
Cites
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
Williams, J. B. W., & First, M. B. (2013) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780199975839.013.104 · Cited by 109,845
Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta‐analysis
Higgins, J. P. T., & Thompson, S. G. (2002) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.1186 · Cited by 36,763
QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies
Whiting, P. F., Rutjes, A. W. S., Westwood, M. E., Mallett, S., Deeks, J. J., Reitsma, J. B., Leeflang, M. M. G., Sterne, J. A. C., Bossuyt, P. M. M., & the QUADAS-2 Group* (2011) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-155-8-201110180-00009 · Cited by 14,199
Detection of Postnatal Depression: Development of the 10-item Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale
Cox, J. L., Holden, J. M., & Sagovsky, R. (1987) · British Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1192/bjp.150.6.782 · Cited by 14,183
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV)
Hu, R. J. (2003) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b0-12-226870-9/01070-4 · Cited by 9,168
PRESS Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies: 2015 Guideline Statement
McGowan, J., Sampson, M., Salzwedel, D. M., Cogo, E., Foerster, V., & Lefebvre, C. (2016) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.01.021 · Cited by 5,700
Lecrubier, Y., Sheehan, D., Weiller, E., Amorim, P., Bonora, I., Sheehan, K. H., Janavs, J., & Dunbar, G. (1997) · European Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/s0924-9338(97)83296-8 · Cited by 3,513
McInnes, M. D. F., Moher, D., Thombs, B. D., McGrath, T. A., Bossuyt, P. M., and the PRISMA-DTA Group, Clifford, T., Cohen, J. F., Deeks, J. J., Gatsonis, C., et al. (2018) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2017.19163 · Cited by 3,210
Self-citationRobins, L. N. (1988) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1988.01800360017003 · Cited by 2,909
Sheehan, D., Lecrubier, Y., Harnett Sheehan, K., Janavs, J., Weiller, E., Keskiner, A., Schinka, J., Knapp, E., Sheehan, M., & Dunbar, G. (1997) · European Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/s0924-9338(97)83297-x · Cited by 2,149
Flagged first, then by citations
1 of the 42 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- O’Connor E Rossom RC Henninger M . Screening for depression in adults: an updated systematic evidence review for the US Preventive Services Task Force: evidence synthesis No. 128. [AHRQ Publication No. 14-05208-EF-1] Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, 2016.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 301–400 of 922
Zhou, L., Tang, L., Zhou, C., Wen, S. W., Krewski, D. R., & Xie, R. (2024) · Frontiers in Psychiatry · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2024.1385229 · Cited by 8
Xiao, G., Wang, H., Hu, J., Zhao, Z., Li, Q., & Qin, C. (2024) · Heliyon · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e35089 · Cited by 7
“We considered that the cutoff score for the same scale is controversial; for example, cutoff scores that have been used for the EPDS are 10 and 13 points [19].”
MethodHansen, K., Kukora, S. K., Sherman, A., & Feldman, K. (2024) · Journal of Perinatology · doi:10.1038/s41372-024-02118-8 · Cited by 7
“Initially utilizing the standard clinical EPDS screening score cutoff ( ≥ 10), and then again at ≥ 13, a secondary threshold commonly found in depression literature [29].”
Hall, M., Oakey, H., Penno, M. A. S., McGorm, K. J., Anderson, A. J., Ashwood, P., Colman, P. G., Craig, M. E., Davis, E. A., Harris, M. A., et al. (2022) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/dc21-2335 · Cited by 7
Barber, C. C., Middlemiss, W., & Medvedev, O. N. (2022) · Journal of Affective Disorders · doi:10.1016/j.jad.2022.04.009 · Cited by 7
Wilson, C. A., Gómez‐Gómez, I., Parsons, J., Costa, R. A., Mesquita, A. R., Vousoura, E., Contreras-García, Y., Levy, D., Mateus, V., Christoforou, A., et al. (2022) · Journal of Women s Health · doi:10.1089/jwh.2021.0584 · Cited by 7
Studniczek, A., & Kossakowska, K. (2022) · Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.3390/bs12100371 · Cited by 7
“[28] found that an EPDS cut-off value of 11 or a higher value for the maximized combined sensitivity and specificity.”
BackgroundNassar, E., Levis, B., Neyer, M. A., Rice, D. B., Booij, L., Benedetti, A., & Thombs, B. D. (2022) · International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research · doi:10.1002/mpr.1910 · Cited by 7
Self-citationSchmidt-Hantke, J., Vollert, B., Nacke, B., Hagner, F., Brüderl, H., & Jacobi, C. (2024) · Internet Interventions · doi:10.1016/j.invent.2024.100765 · Cited by 7
“As recommended (Levis et al., 2020), a cut-off of EPDS ≥ 10 has been applied to form post-hoc subgroups based on the extent of psychological distress.”
BackgroundMethodGroup-Based Trajectory Analysis for Postpartum Depression Symptoms among Chinese Primiparous Women
Xiong, J., Fang, Q., Huang, L., Yan, X., & Zheng, X. (2022) · Journal of Clinical Medicine · doi:10.3390/jcm11216249 · Cited by 6
Development and validation of the Peripartum depression scale
Radoš, S. N., Matijaš, M., Brekalo, M., & Žutić, M. (2024) · Journal of Affective Disorders Reports · doi:10.1016/j.jadr.2024.100820 · Cited by 6
Stump, C. M., Peralta, F. M., Sultan, P., Holland, M. E., Badreldin, N., Shepard, L. C., & McCarthy, R. J. (2024) · BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth · doi:10.1186/s12884-024-06805-4 · Cited by 6
Žutić, M., Matijaš, M., & Radoš, S. N. (2024) · Breastfeeding Medicine · doi:10.1089/bfm.2024.0172 · Cited by 6
Gebregziabher, N. K., Netsereab, T. B., Alazar, F., Fessaha, Y. G., Sium, A. H., & Ghebrehiwet, N. K. (2025) · International Journal of Women s Health · doi:10.2147/ijwh.s487258 · Cited by 7
Němcová, H., Kuklová, M., Hrdličková, K., Hořáková, A., & Šebela, A. (2025) · BMC Psychology · doi:10.1186/s40359-024-02308-1 · Cited by 10
“According to the meta-analysis of Levis et al. [41], this cut-off score maximizes the combined sensitivity and specificity for the screening of peri-natal depression.”
Wang, Y., Wang, J., Chen, P., Zhang, J., Lin, Q., Izci‐Balserak, B., Li, Y., Bei, B., & Zhu, B. (2025) · BMC Psychiatry · doi:10.1186/s12888-025-07026-5 · Cited by 6
“A score of ≥ 13 was considered clinically elevated depression [21].”
Singla, D. R., Lawson, A., Dennis, C., Kaliush, P. R., Walsh, K., Patel, V., & Schiller, C. E. (2025) · Nature Reviews Psychology · doi:10.1038/s44159-025-00505-2 · Cited by 6
Lager, S., Gidén, K., Axfors, C., Sigvardsson, F., Kollia, N., Nylander, I., Fransson, E., & Skalkidou, A. (2022) · Archives of Women s Mental Health · doi:10.1007/s00737-022-01268-y · Cited by 6
Sójta, K., Margulska, A., Plewka, M. K., Płeska, K., Strzelecki, D., & Gawlik-Kotelnicka, O. (2023) · Journal of Clinical Medicine · doi:10.3390/jcm12196279 · Cited by 8
Cumerlato, C. B. D. F., Cademartori, M. G., Barros, F. C., Dâmaso, A. H., da Silveira, M. F., Hallal, P. C., Demarco, F. F., & Corrêa, M. B. (2023) · Clinical Oral Investigations · doi:10.1007/s00784-023-05351-1 · Cited by 7
Singla, D. R., de Oliveira, C., Murphy, S. M., Patel, V., Charlebois, J., Davis, W. N., Dennis, C., Kim, J., Kurdyak, P. A., Lawson, A., et al. (2023) · BMC Psychiatry · doi:10.1186/s12888-023-05318-2 · Cited by 7
Negeri, Z., Levis, B., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Thombs, B. D., Benedetti, A., the DEPRESsion Screening Data (DEPRESSD) EPDS Group, Sun, Y., He, C., Krishnan, A., Wu, Y., et al. (2024) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/s12874-023-02134-w · Cited by 6
Self-citationVaghef‐Mehrabany, E., Bell, R. C., Field, C. J., Jarman, M., Evanchuk, J. L., Letourneau, N. L., & Giesbrecht, G. F. (2024) · British Journal Of Nutrition · doi:10.1017/s0007114524001028 · Cited by 6
“We used the cut-off of 10 to identify individuals at risk of prenatal depression (51) .”
Gidén, K., Björvang, R. D., White, R. A., Vinnerljung, L., Iliadis, S. I., Skalkidou, A., & Fransson, E. (2024) · Depression and Anxiety · doi:10.1155/2024/7734542 · Cited by 6
“To increase speci fi city, a higher cutoff score for EPDS could be used [33].”
Halstead, I. N., Heron, J., Svob, C., & Joinson, C. J. (2024) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2024.117342 · Cited by 6
Li, K., Chai, Z., Deng, C., Niu, G., Geng, X., Zhang, Y., Wang, Y., & Wang, T. (2025) · BMC Anesthesiology · doi:10.1186/s12871-024-02846-6 · Cited by 7
“The ratio of postpartum depression (PPD) was recorded 42 days after delivery, which was diagnosed by an EPDS score of ≥ 13 [21].”
Kostiuk, O., Shunko, Y., Jusienė, R., Breidokienė, R., Drejerienė, V., Lesinskienė, S., & Valiulis, A. (2024) · Central European Journal of Public Health · doi:10.21101/cejph.a8003 · Cited by 6
Preconception paternal mental health history as predictor of antenatal depression in pregnant women
Orsolini, L., Karaman, İ. G. Y., Bottaro, M., Bellagamba, S., Francesconi, G., & Volpe, U. (2025) · Annals of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1186/s12991-025-00554-0 · Cited by 6
Giouleka, S., Tsiona, E., Kapetanios, G., Zerva, C., Papazisis, G., Mamopoulos, A. M., Dagklis, T., & Tsakiridis, I. G. (2025) · Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey · doi:10.1097/ogx.0000000000001384 · Cited by 6
Kmita, G., Kiepura, E., & Niedźwiecka, A. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.812893 · Cited by 6
Miller, A. P., SHOPTAW, S. J., Mvududu, R., Mashele, N., Coates, T. J., Bekker, L., Essack, Z., Groenewald, C., Petersen, Z., Gorbach, P. M., et al. (2022) · AIDS and Behavior · doi:10.1007/s10461-022-03742-1 · Cited by 6
Determinants of Mental Healthcare-Seeking Behavior of Postpartum Women in Ibadan, Nigeria
Odufuwa, O., Olaniyan, O. A., & Okuonzi, S. A. (2022) · Frontiers in Global Women s Health · doi:10.3389/fgwh.2022.787263 · Cited by 6
Lancaster, E. E., Lapato, D. M., & Peterson, R. E. (2022) · Frontiers in Genetics · doi:10.3389/fgene.2022.1022188 · Cited by 6
Oon‐arom, A., Suradom, C., Srichairatanakool, S., Luewan, S., Petiwathayakorn, T., Maneeton, B., Maneeton, N., Kawilapat, S., & Srisurapanont, M. (2022) · Asian Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.ajp.2022.103392 · Cited by 6
Cao, Y., Wei, Q., Zou, L., Jiang, S., Deng, H., Jiang, C., Cui, N., Huang, S., Ge, Y., Li, Y., et al. (2023) · Food & Function · doi:10.1039/d2fo03129a · Cited by 6
Simen, S., Kuscher, K., Schröder, L., Terzioğlu, N., Schröder, T., Jung, R., Köhler, W., Dammer, U., Kastner, B., Hillemacher, T., et al. (2023) · Zeitschrift für Geburtshilfe und Neonatologie · doi:10.1055/a-2016-9737 · Cited by 6
Immigration Policy and the Health of Latina Mothers and Their Infants
Raffa, B. J., Swartz, J. J., Ranapurwala, S. I., Zhao, C., & Cholera, R. (2023) · Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health · doi:10.1007/s10903-023-01476-3 · Cited by 6
Rådmark, L., Osika, W., Wallén, M. B., Nissen, E., Lönnberg, G., Bränström, R., Henje, E., Gardner, R. M., Fransson, E., Karlsson, H., et al. (2023) · BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth · doi:10.1186/s12884-023-05528-2 · Cited by 6
“The EPDS contains ten items that are used to assess depressive symptoms [12, 32], and a Swedish version has been validated [43].”
MethodCamacho, E. M., Shields, G., Chew-Graham, C. A., Eisner, E., Gilbody, S. M., Littlewood, E., McMillan, D., Watson, K., Fearon, P. R. M., & Sharp, D. J. (2023) · The European Journal of Health Economics · doi:10.1007/s10198-023-01589-4 · Cited by 6
“A range of cut-off scores are used in practice and in different contexts, but scores commonly used to denote caseness for postnatal depression are scores ≥ 10 or ≥ 13 [19, 29, 30].”
MethodSlade, L. J., Obst, K. L., Deussen, A. R., & Dodd, J. M. (2023) · European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology · doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2023.07.003 · Cited by 6
Maternal childhood trauma and observed maternal care behaviors with 4-month-old infants.
VanBronkhorst, S. B., McCormack, C. A., Scorza, P., Lee, S., Feng, T., Hane, A. A., Duarte, C. S., & Monk, C. E. (2023) · Psychological Trauma Theory Research Practice and Policy · doi:10.1037/tra0001554 · Cited by 6
Sirkiä, C., Laakkonen, E., Nordenswan, E., Karlsson, L., Korja, R., Karlsson, H., & Kataja, E. (2023) · Sexual & Reproductive Healthcare · doi:10.1016/j.srhc.2023.100930 · Cited by 6
Wright, E., Martinovic, J., Meschino, D. D. C., Barker, L. C., Philipp, D. A., Israel, A., Hussain‐Shamsy, N., Mukerji, G., Wang, V., Chatterjee, A., et al. (2023) · BMC Psychiatry · doi:10.1186/s12888-023-05444-x · Cited by 6
“We used the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS), a 10-item scale (range 0–30) validated in the perinatal period to measure depressive symptoms [28], and where a score of ≥ 11 maximizes sensitivity and specificity to detect major depression in postpartum people [29].”
MethodJurgelėnė, V., Kuzmickienė, V., & Stonienė, D. (2024) · Children · doi:10.3390/children11020232 · Cited by 6
“Mothers fill in a questionnaire about their daily routine, and those who score above 13 are likely to have PPD [34].”
BackgroundAsefa, A., Gebremedhin, S., Délamou, A., Marchal, B., & Beňová, L. (2024) · Reproductive Health · doi:10.1186/s12978-024-01850-w · Cited by 6
Cimino, S., Tambelli, R., Vito, P. D., D’Angeli, G., & Cerniglia, L. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychiatry · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2022.968171 · Cited by 7
“A higher score indicates a higher level of depression symptoms, and the recent individual patient data meta-analysis established 11 as a cut-off score (46).”
BackgroundScheinost, D., Chang, J. T., Brennan‐Wydra, E., Lacadie, C., Constable, R. T., Chawarska, K., & Ment, L. R. (2022) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/2022.09.27.509687 · Cited by 6
ACNP 62nd Annual Meeting: Poster Abstracts P251 – P500
(2023) · Neuropsychopharmacology · doi:10.1038/s41386-023-01756-4 · Cited by 6
Sharapova, A., & Ratcliff, B. G. (2025) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1477817 · Cited by 6
Zeng, N., Goh, P. H. Y., Chua, T.-E., Sultana, R., Tan, C. W., Sng, B. L., & Chen, H. (2025) · Journal of Affective Disorders · doi:10.1016/j.jad.2025.03.149 · Cited by 5
Duguay, G., Garon‐Bissonnette, J., Lemieux, R., Dubois‐Comtois, K., & Berthelot, N. (2025) · Child Abuse & Neglect · doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2025.107443 · Cited by 5
Associations between fetal movement and maternal-fetal attachment in late pregnancy
Ayala, K., Falcioni, L., Eilbott, J., Lamore, J., Voegtline, K., & Rutherford, H. J. V. (2025) · Early Human Development · doi:10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2025.106351 · Cited by 7
Oestrogen receptor genes and perinatal depression symptoms: systematic review
Zorzini, G., & Ehlert, U. (2025) · The British Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1192/bjp.2025.39 · Cited by 5
Efficacy of Single‐Dose Intravenous Ferric Derisomaltose for Iron Deficiency Anemia in Pregnancy
Benson, A. E., Martens, K. L., Rincon, M. P., Ward, L., Kelley, T. P., Sullivan, E. L., Lewkowitz, A. K., Tuuli, M. G., Graham, J. A., Shatzel, J. J., et al. (2026) · American Journal of Hematology · doi:10.1002/ajh.70190 · Cited by 5
Kam, H. A., Arora, I. H., Pham, C. T., Chon, E., Lee, M. M., Agwu, O., Zhang, J., Milavsky, E., Edlow, A. G., Hughes, F., et al. (2026) · Pregnancy · doi:10.1002/pmf2.70220 · Cited by 7
Song, Z., Zhou, Y., Zheng, Y., Huang, W., Meng, Z., Li, H., Jiang, R., Teng, Y., & Tao, M. (2023) · International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics · doi:10.1002/ijgo.14663 · Cited by 5
Konsam, M., Praharaj, S. K., Panda, S., Shetty, J., Ravishankar, N., & D’Souza, S. R. B. (2023) · Indian Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.4103/indianjpsychiatry.indianjpsychiatry_180_23 · Cited by 5
“[31] In this present study, we considered EPDS scores above 13 as “at risk of developing antenatal depression, while scores below 13 were considered free from antenatal depression.”
Hamadneh, S., Hamadneh, J., Abdalrahim, A., ALBashtawy, M., Suliman, M., Alolayaan, M., & Alkhawaldeh, A. (2024) · Iranian Journal of Nursing and Midwifery Research · doi:10.4103/ijnmr.ijnmr_100_22 · Cited by 5
“[6] A national previous online survey indicated that postpartum depression among Jordanian women was high at (53%).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialLesser, I., Wurz, A. J., Bean, C. N., & Hatfield, G. L. (2024) · Nursing for Women s Health · doi:10.1016/j.nwh.2024.01.006 · Cited by 5
Tan, H. S., Tan, C. W., Sultana, R., Yang, L., Mok, M. U. S., & Sng, B. L. (2024) · Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d anesthésie · doi:10.1007/s12630-024-02799-x · Cited by 5
Zangmo, S., Boonchieng, W., Suvanayos, C., Gyeltshen, K., & Siewchaisakul, P. (2024) · Women s Health Nursing · doi:10.4069/whn.2024.09.02 · Cited by 5
Lansing, L., Wendel, S. B., Westlund, E. W., & Marsk, E. (2024) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-024-75552-5 · Cited by 5
Smith‐Nielsen, J., Egmose, I., Matthey, S., Stougaard, M., Reijman, S., & Væver, M. S. (2025) · International Journal of Nursing Studies Advances · doi:10.1016/j.ijnsa.2024.100284 · Cited by 5
Mohamed, A. H., Abobaker, R. M., touni, M. I., AlHseinat, M. M., Ali, H. M., Razek, R. A. A., Albougami, A. S. B., Berdida, D. J. E., & Elrefaey, S. R. (2025) · Women s Health · doi:10.1177/17455057251323155 · Cited by 5
“Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) 35,36 was used to determine depressive symptoms among post-partum women.”
The complex interaction between oestrogen receptor genes, oestradiol, and perinatal mood
Zorzini, G., Johann, A., Đukić, J., & Ehlert, U. (2025) · Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience · doi:10.1080/19585969.2025.2482126 · Cited by 5
“…validation study (cox et al. 1987) and below the proposed cut-off score of 11 to maximise combined sensitivity and specificity for depression (levis et al. 2020). in addition, although exploratory follow-up analyses were conducted to examine the association with perinatal depression, the…”
InfluentialThe Relationship between Healthcare Experience and Perinatal Depression during COVID-19 Pandemic
Kovacheva, K., Rodríguez-Muñoz, M. F., Baya, D., Salas, S. D., & Motrico, E. (2022) · Clínica y Salud. Investigación Empírica en Psicología · doi:10.5093/clysa2022a13 · Cited by 5
“We assumed a lower sensitivity but higher specificity (Levis et al., 2020).”
BackgroundMethodFransson, E., Karalexi, M. A., Kimmel, M., Bränn, E., Kollia, N., Tas, A., van Zoest, V., Nordling, E., Skalkidou, A., & Papadopoulos, F. C. (2022) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-022-25107-3 · Cited by 6
Postpartum Depression: Neglected Issue in Maternal Health
Mousa, O., Sabati, S. Y. A., & Khars, F. A. (2023) · International Journal of Nursing Education · doi:10.37506/ijone.v15i1.18995 · Cited by 5
Shinohara, S., Horiuchi, S., Shinohara, R., Otawa, S., Kushima, M., Miyake, K., Yui, H., Kojima, R., Ooka, T., Akiyama, Y., et al. (2023) · Journal of Affective Disorders · doi:10.1016/j.jad.2023.02.088 · Cited by 6
A Systemwide Postpartum Inpatient Maternal Mental Health Education and Screening Program
Torti, J., Klein, C., Foster, M., & Shields, L. E. (2023) · Nursing for Women s Health · doi:10.1016/j.nwh.2022.12.005 · Cited by 5
The socio-demographic profile associated with perinatal depression during the COVID-19 era
Kovacheva, K., Rodríguez-Muñoz, M. F., Gómez-Baya, D., Domínguez-Salas, S., & Motrico, E. (2023) · BMC Public Health · doi:10.1186/s12889-023-15665-0 · Cited by 5
Olazábal, D. E., Bertoni, B., Grandi, G., Musetti, D., Rey, G., Sandberg, N. Y., Fernández, L., Laporte, G., Medici, F., & Nicolaisen‐Sobesky, E. (2023) · Developmental Psychobiology · doi:10.1002/dev.22400 · Cited by 5
Lafferty, A. K., Duryea, E. L., Martin, R., Moseley, L., Lopez, M. S., McIntire, D. D., Spong, C. Y., & Nelson, D. B. (2023) · American Journal of Perinatology · doi:10.1055/a-2113-2739 · Cited by 6
Acetaminophen use during pregnancy: is there a problem?
Church, P., Werner, E. F., & Davis, J. M. (2024) · Pediatric Research · doi:10.1038/s41390-024-03050-5 · Cited by 5
Sousa, M., Fidalgo, D., de Sousa, C. N. S., Garthus‐Niegel, S., Riklikienė, O., Pawlicka, P., Jomeen, J., Jongenelen, I., Seefeld, L., Jarašiūnaitė–Fedosejeva, G., et al. (2025) · Journal of Affective Disorders · doi:10.1016/j.jad.2025.01.063 · Cited by 5
Christopher, D., Markese, A., Tonick, S., Carpenter, L., & Harrison, M. S. (2022) · Women s Health · doi:10.1177/17455057221122590 · Cited by 5
Sarfi, M., Eikemo, M., & Konijnenberg, C. (2022) · Frontiers in Pediatrics · doi:10.3389/fped.2022.1087956 · Cited by 5
“Based on a number of studies, a cut-off of 13 or higher could be used to identify pregnant and postpartum women with higher symptom levels, whereas lower cut-off values could be used if the intention is to avoid false negatives and identify most patients who meet diagnostic criteria (46).”
BackgroundKaiyo-Utete, M., Langhaug, L. F., Chingono, A., Dambi, J. M., Magwali, T. L., Henderson, C., & Chirenje, Z. M. (2023) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0270873 · Cited by 7
Screening for Postpartum Depression: Barriers, Guidelines, and Measurement ScalesPreprint
Kendall-Tackett, K. A. (2024) · Preprints.org · doi:10.20944/preprints202408.0463.v1 · Cited by 5
Scarth, B., Wereta, S., McVicar, K., King, K., & Buist, A. (2026) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-10714437/v1 · Cited by 5
Titi, I., Ahmead, M., Abed, Y. A., & Sharif, N. E. (2024) · Clinical Practice and Epidemiology in Mental Health · doi:10.2174/0117450179338712240909153229 · Cited by 4
Ingram, J. C., Odd, D., Beasant, L., Chakkarapani, E., & teams, O. B. O. C. A. C. S. (2024) · Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology · doi:10.1080/02646838.2024.2423178 · Cited by 4
“EPDS ≥ 13 was defined as indicative of depression (Levis et al., 2020).”
Koutra, K., Mouatsou, C., Margetaki, K., Roumeliotaki, T., Mavroeides, G., Psoma, S., Kampouri, M., Karachaliou, M., Kogevinas, M., & Chatzi, L. (2025) · European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry · doi:10.1007/s00787-025-02746-1 · Cited by 4
Motofelea, N., Galiș, R., Szasz, F. A., Motofelea, A. C., Hoinoiu, T., Trinc, S., Papavă, I., Olaru, F., Berceanu, C., Pârvănescu, R., et al. (2026) · Journal of Clinical Medicine · doi:10.3390/jcm15031029 · Cited by 4
“EPDS scores were analyzed both continuously and categorically using two established cutoffs: EPDS ≥ 10 (possible depression; sensitivity = 0.85, specificity = 0.84) and EPDS ≥ 13 (probable major depression; sensitivity = 0.66, specificity = 0.95) [32].”
InfluentialIs the mental health of couples with twins more at risk? Results from an Italian cohort study
Bonanni, G., Longo, V. L., Airoldi, C. A., Meli, F., Familiari, A., Romanzi, F., Pellegrino, M., Visconti, D., Serio, A., Lanzone, A., et al. (2024) · Frontiers in Psychiatry · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2024.1284090 · Cited by 4
Tan, D. J. A., Sultana, R., Chow, S. Y. X., Tan, C. W., Tan, H. S., Chen, H., Chua, T.-E., & Sng, B. L. (2024) · Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment · doi:10.2147/ndt.s448853 · Cited by 4
“However, it is important to acknowledge that the EPDS is not intended for diagnostic purposes but rather serves as a screening tool to identify parturients at risk of PND. 34 The formal diagnosis of PND should still be performed by medically trained healthcare professionals.”
Dynamics of postnatal depressive symptoms in early parenthood
Skjerdingstad, N., Speyer, L. G., Isvoranu, A., Moe, V., & Fredriksen, E. (2024) · BMC Psychiatry · doi:10.1186/s12888-024-05934-6 · Cited by 4
“Furthermore, using a cut-off score of 11 [31] for maternal postpartum depression, 24 mothers (2.77”
MethodInfluentialGestational diabetes and mental health: longitudinal analysis of data from the GEMS randomized trial
Ohene‐Agyei, P., Gamble, G. D., Tran, T. D., Harding, J. E., & Crowther, C. A. (2025) · Archives of Women s Mental Health · doi:10.1007/s00737-024-01551-0 · Cited by 5
“We used a score of > 12 to indicate vulnerability to depression, a cut-off shown to have the highest specificity in both the antenatal and postpartum period (Levis et al. 2020).”
Integrating postnatal care into the redesign of group care beyond birth
Gresh, A., Damme, A. V., Billings, D. L., Rising, S. S., Ibrahim, S., Ajibola, A., Chirwa, E. M., Don-Aki, J., Donoho, N., Hindori, M. P., et al. (2025) · Archives of Public Health · doi:10.1186/s13690-025-01508-4 · Cited by 4
Moon, B., Kim, H. K., Nho, J., Choi, H., Chung, C., Kang, S. J., Kim, J. H., Lee, J.-Y., Park, S., Shin, G., et al. (2025) · Ewha Medical Journal · doi:10.12771/emj.2025.e15 · Cited by 6
Ciolac, L., Bernad, E. S., Tudor, A., Nițu, D.-R., Buleu, F. N., Popa, D. I., Toc, T., Haivas, C. C., & Craina, M. L. (2025) · Journal of Clinical Medicine · doi:10.3390/jcm14124286 · Cited by 4
Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum in Mothers With Type 1 Diabetes
Price, S. (2022) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/dci22-0007 · Cited by 4
Fuente‐Moreno, M., Garcia-Terol, C., Domínguez‐Salas, S., Rubio-Valera, M., & Motrico, E. (2023) · Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology · doi:10.1080/02646838.2023.2171375 · Cited by 4
“Clinically significant depressive symptoms were defined as women having a total EPDS score of ≥ 13 (Levis et al., 2020).”
BackgroundLABOUR ANALGESIA AND THE RISK OF POSTPARTUM DEPRESSION
Romanenko, A., & Bielka, K. (2022) · Wiadomości Lekarskie · doi:10.36740/wlek202212109 · Cited by 4
Moran, L. R., Sheehan, J. D., Roddy, D., & Duffy, R. M. (2023) · Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/ipm.2023.12 · Cited by 4
“The EPDS has an established sensitivity and specificity of between 0.66 – 0.85 and 0.84 – 0.95, respectively, for identifying depression, depending on the cut-off used (10 – 13) (Levis et al. 2020).”
MethodInfluentialElansary, M., Kistin, C. J., Antonio, J., Fernández-Pastrana, I., Lee-Parritz, A., Cabral, H., Miller, E. S., & Silverstein, M. (2023) · JAMA Network Open · doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.13151 · Cited by 4
Relationship between social support and perinatal depression during the COVID-19 pandemic
Kovacheva, K., Rodríguez-Muñoz, M. D. L. F., Gómez-Baya, D., Domínguez-Salas, S., & Motrico, E. (2023) · Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology · doi:10.1080/02646838.2023.2230585 · Cited by 4
“In this study, the Spanish validation (Garcia-Esteve et al., 2003) with a threshold of 13 or more was used to identify clinically significant symptoms, assuming lower sensitivity but higher specificity (Levis et al., 2020).”
Associations of COVID-19 Stressors and Postpartum Depression and Anxiety Symptoms in New Mothers
Rohde, J. F., Harrison, M., Berman, T., Flatley, C. A., Okonak, K., Cutuli, J. J., & Hatchimonji, D. R. (2023) · Maternal and Child Health Journal · doi:10.1007/s10995-023-03749-7 · Cited by 5
Perinatal depression before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in New York City
Lantigua-Martinez, M. V., Trostle, M. E., Torres, A. M., Rajeev, P. T., Dennis, A., Silverstein, J. S., & Talib, M. (2023) · AJOG Global Reports · doi:10.1016/j.xagr.2023.100253 · Cited by 4
The Association between Sleep and Depression during Late Pregnancy and the Early Postpartum Period
Jones, A. G., Hadaie, B., Bennett, R. D., Kumar, N., Saha, C., & Haas, D. M. (2024) · American Journal of Perinatology Reports · doi:10.1055/s-0043-1778003 · Cited by 4
Metadata
- Authors
- Levis, B., Negeri, Z., Sun, Y., Benedetti, A., & Thombs, B. D.
- Affiliations
- Jewish General Hospital (CA)
- McGill University Health Centre (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Thombs, Brett D
- Venue
- BMJ
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2020-11-11
- Volume
- 371
- Pages
- m4022
- ISSN
- 1756-1833 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC7656313
- OpenAlex
- W3093810429
- Semantic Scholar
- 78cf2d7bf5e2dc7094c88c17b4deb98714fadfab
- Cited by
- 922
- References
- 42
- Citations by year
- 2026: 174 · 2025: 216 · 2024: 190 · 2023: 167 · 2022: 123 · 2021: 50 · 2020: 1
- FWCI
- 14.25
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- BMJ (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
- IRIS Research product catalog (Sapienza University of Rome) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- Diva portal (Dalarna University Library) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- eScholarship@McGill (McGill) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation
- Patrick and Catherine Weldon Donaghue Medical Research Foundation
- Yale University
- Universidad de Santiago de Chile
- University of Connecticut
- McGill University
- Faculty of Medicine, McGill University
- Sveučilište u Zagrebu
- Wellcome Trust (211374/Z/18/Z, 082384/Z/07/Z/, 071571)
- McGill University Health Centre
- Australian Government
- National Institute for Health and Care Research (RP-PG-1210-12002, RP-DG-1108-10012)
- Department of Health and Social Care
- University of Southampton
- King's College London
- University of Oxford
- University of Bristol
- National Research Foundation
- Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung (0000000, 10002, 32003B, 125493)
- University of New South Wales
- Deakin University
- Monash University
- Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo
- Chulalongkorn University (CU-56-457-HR)
- Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (POCI 2010, 00000-00, 2014-5)
- Sapienza Università di Roma
- China Medical University Hospital
- Università degli Studi di Firenze
- Harry Crossley Foundation
- Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Minas Gerais (0000000, POCI 2010)
- Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
- Université de Genève
- Ministério da Saúde
- Uppsala Universitet
- University of Cape Town
- China Medical University
- Universidade do Minho
- Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research
- Szegedi Tudományegyetem
- Werner Otto Stiftung
- Duke Global Health Institute, Duke University (453-0751)
- Feinberg School of Medicine
- Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King’s College London
- Canadian Institutes of Health Research (140994_1)
- Fonds de Recherche du Québec - Santé
- Medical Research Council (MR/S035818/1)
- National Health and Medical Research Council
- Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University
- Programme Grants for Applied Research (RP-PG-1210-12002)
- Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf
- National Institute of Mental Health (K23MH64476)
- Fondo Nacional de Desarrollo Científico y Tecnológico (1130230)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Maternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Maternal and Neonatal Healthcare
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
- Keywords
- Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale, postpartum depression, major depressive disorder, pregnancy, screening accuracy, sensitivity and specificity, cut-off values, diagnostic interview, MINI, semi-structured interviews, reference materials, subgroup analysis, maternal mental health
- MeSH terms
- Depressive Disorder, Major, Major Depressive Disorder, Female, Humans, Pregnancy, Pregnancy Complications, Prenatal Care, Psychometrics, Sensitivity and Specificity, Depression, Postpartum
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-08, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-08 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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
