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 501–600 of 922
Costantini, I., Kounali, D., Culpin, I., Bornstein, M. H., & Pearson, R. M. (2025) · Frontiers in Child and Adolescent Psychiatry · doi:10.3389/frcha.2025.1638234 · Cited by 2
“Model fit statistics and diagnostics are reported in Supplementary Appendix, p.7 (48, 51).”
Haruna, M., Fujita, M., Matsuzaki, M., Shiraishi, M., Hikita, N., Suetsugu, Y., Sato, Y., Yonezawa, K., Tanaka, M., Ohori, R., et al. (2025) · Methods and Protocols · doi:10.3390/mps8060128 · Cited by 2
Early pregnancy depressive symptoms and severe maternal morbidity
Bank, T. C., Catov, J. M., Wu, J., Yee, L. M., Miller, M. L., McNeil, R. B., Lemon, L. S., Reddy, U. M., Silver, R. M., Zafman, K. B., et al. (2025) · American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology MFM · doi:10.1016/j.ajogmf.2025.101830 · Cited by 2
Yamada, T., Terada, S., & Murakoshi, T. (2025) · Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology research · doi:10.1111/jog.70146 · Cited by 2
Disrespectful Maternity Care and Postpartum Depression at 2 Months: A Population‐Based Study
Jacques, M., Chantry, A. A., Tebeka, S., Evrard, A., Doncarli, A., Lelong, N., Ray, C. L., & the ENP2021 Study Group (2025) · BJOG An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology · doi:10.1111/1471-0528.70093 · Cited by 3
Hernández‐Martínez, C., Canals-Sans, J., Patricio, D., Sombrero, I., Ruiz, F., & Rey-Reñones, C. (2025) · BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth · doi:10.1186/s12884-025-08557-1 · Cited by 2
Huang, Y., Nie, S., Yang, P., Pei, Y., Dong, M., Cui, N., Zhang, X., & Cao, F. (2026) · Journal of Affective Disorders · doi:10.1016/j.jad.2025.121118 · Cited by 2
Holbanel, L.-M., Turcu-Ştiolică, A., Glăvan, D., Toma, S. C., & Cernea, N. (2026) · Journal of Clinical Medicine · doi:10.3390/jcm15010395 · Cited by 2
“A cut-off score ≥ 13 was used to indicate a high risk of PPD, maximizing combined sensitivity and specificity [25].”
Vigod, S. N., Dalfen, A., Dennis, C., Amato, M., Grigoriadis, S., Jamieson, T., Bishop, K., Lubotzky‐Gete, S., Michalowska, M., Shah, V., et al. (2026) · Communications Medicine · doi:10.1038/s43856-026-01381-4 · Cited by 2
“Cut-off scores on the EPDS for varying levels of symptom severity were usedasa guide (e.g., EPDS 13 representing milder symptom levels, 13 – 18 representing mild to moderately severe symptoms and 19 or greater representing moderate to severe symptoms) 17 .”
Krohn, H., Shelly, S., Gibori, J. E., Andrejek, N., Porte, L. M. L., Lawson, A., Anand, A., Berenbaum, T. S., Dennis, C., Griffen, A., et al. (2026) · Frontiers in Psychiatry · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2025.1686719 · Cited by 2
Validation of the City Birth Trauma Scale in a sample of Norwegian mothers
Haga, S. M., Bergunde, L., Seefeld, L., Ayers, S., Eberhard‐Gran, M., & Garthus‐Niegel, S. (2026) · Acta Obstetricia Et Gynecologica Scandinavica · doi:10.1111/aogs.70149 · Cited by 2
“54,55 The 10-item scale rates symptoms from the past week on a four-point scale (0–3), with total scores ranging from 0 to 30.”
Chrzan‐Dętkoś, M., Liakea, I., Murawska, N., Costa, R., Uka, A., Krupelnytska, L., Vavilova, A., García-López, H. S., & Morozova-Larina, O. (2026) · Clínica y Salud · doi:10.5093/clh2026a6 · Cited by 2
Woofter, R. C., Rao, R., & Sudhinaraset, M. (2026) · American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology MFM · doi:10.1016/j.ajogmf.2025.101876 · Cited by 2
SÜTCÜOĞLU, B. M., ÖZTOP, M. M., & Hansu, K. (2026) · BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth · doi:10.1186/s12884-026-09011-6 · Cited by 2
“In our study, the prevalence of postnatal depression, measured using the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS), was consistent with large-scale investigations reporting median scores between 9 and 11 [18, 19].”
Sparling, T. M., Cornejo, C., Offner, C., Mayer, A., Waid, J. L., Kadiyala, S., & Gabrysch, S. (2026) · BMJ Global Health · doi:10.1136/bmjgh-2025-020509 · Cited by 2
“Our mediation hypothesis is based on three points: (a) that food security, dietary diversity and women’s empowerment can all contribute to mental health in distinct ways, even though there is some correlation between experiential constructs of food insecurity and low dietary diversity (eg, through…”
Time-varying restless legs syndrome and risk of incident perinatal depression
Tezuka, K., Ito, Y., Sasaki, N., & Nishi, D. (2026) · Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine · doi:10.1007/s44470-026-00168-7 · Cited by 2
Kawira, D. M., Gitonga, L. K., & Mukhwana, E. S. (2021) · International Journal of Health Sciences and Research · doi:10.52403/ijhsr.20211202 · Cited by 2
Sweerts, S. J., Rousselin, S., Raffeneau, F., Xavier-David, C., Changeur, V., Apter, G., Romo, L., & Gicquel, L. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychiatry · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2022.986796 · Cited by 3
BumilBahagia (HappyMothers) A Preliminary-study to Help Mothers Maintain Maternal Health
Vinarti, R. A., Tyasnurita, R., Utamima, A., Fadhilah, N. L., & Karimah, A. (2022) · IEEE Region Humanitarian Technology Conference · doi:10.1109/r10-htc54060.2022.9930069 · Cited by 2
“There are some research related to early screening of PPD [20], [21].”
BackgroundCollaton, J., Dennis, C., Taylor, V. H., Grigoriadis, S., Oberlander, T. F., Frey, B. N., Lieshout, R. J. V., Guintivano, J., Meltzer-Brody, S. E., Kennedy, J. L., et al. (2022) · BMC Psychiatry · doi:10.1186/s12888-022-04363-7 · Cited by 2
Sugimura, M., Ohtani, Y., Tamai, S., Kishimoto, U., & Ito, N. (2023) · Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology research · doi:10.1111/jog.15546 · Cited by 2
Carona, C., Monteiro, F., Canavarro, M. C., & Fonseca, A. (2023) · Current Psychology · doi:10.1007/s12144-023-04442-2 · Cited by 4
“In fact, the EPDS, standing as the most widely used depression screening tool in perinatal care (Levis et al., 2020 ), was used in this study as a specific mea - sure to assess women’s postpartum depressive symptoms, which may nonetheless fail to capture broader types of distress (e.g., worrying;…”
Amy Board, D’Angelo, D. V., von Essen, B. S., Denny, C. H., Miele, K., Dunkley, J., Park, Y. J., & Kim, S. Y. (2023) · Journal of Addiction Medicine · doi:10.1097/adm.0000000000001169 · Cited by 3
Benyshek, D. C., Bovbjerg, M. L., & Cheyney, M. J. (2023) · BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth · doi:10.1186/s12884-023-05852-7 · Cited by 2
Risk Factors influencing Post-Partum Depression Severity in Iraqi Women
Al-Imam, A., Haligowska, A., Motyka, M. A., Alabadi, M., Hameed, M., Al-Haideri, M., & Al-Hemiary, N. J. (2023) · AL-Kindy College Medical Journal · doi:10.47723/kcmj.v19i2.1050 · Cited by 2
Semeniuk, D., Boerner, K. E., Brain, U. M., Ryan, D. M., & Oberlander, T. F. (2023) · Child Psychiatry & Human Development · doi:10.1007/s10578-023-01596-9 · Cited by 2
“Scores above 11 maximize sensitivity and specificity for a diagnosis of postpartum depression [46].”
Gibbs, J. M., & Aubuchon-Endsley, N. L. (2023) · Infant Behavior and Development · doi:10.1016/j.infbeh.2023.101889 · Cited by 2
Prevalence and Characteristics of Women with Persistent LBP Postpartum
Madzivhandila, P. M., Cochrane, M. E., & Nkuna, R. D. (2023) · The Open Pain Journal · doi:10.2174/18763863-v16-230825-2023-5 · Cited by 2
Wellington, O. A. (2023) · European Journal of Mental Health · doi:10.5708/ejmh.18.2023.0014 · Cited by 2
“The EPDS is a ten-item self-reporting tool used primarily to evaluate prenatal depression and anxiety symptoms (Levis et al., 2020).”
MethodOhene‐Agyei, P., Tran, T. D., Harding, J. E., & Crowther, C. A. (2023) · BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth · doi:10.1186/s12884-023-06190-4 · Cited by 2
Wu, W., Lee, L., Tsai, C.-H., & Hou, P.-H. (2024) · Clinical Nursing Research · doi:10.1177/10547738241230125 · Cited by 2
“Higher scores indicate higher levels of depression, and scores above 10 are typically considered a risk or indicative of minor depression as a screening cut-off point (Levis et al., 2020).”
BackgroundPremenstrual Dysphoric Disorder and Peripartum Depression
Cox, E., Barker, L. C., Vigod, S. N., & Meltzer-Brody, S. E. (2023) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-42825-9_58-1 · Cited by 2
Bjerregaard, M., Axelin, A., Carlsen, E. M., Birk, H. O., Poulsen, I., Palisz, P., Kallemose, T., & Brødsgaard, A. (2024) · Pediatric Investigation · doi:10.1002/ped4.12420 · Cited by 2
“34 Using a cut-off score of 11 EPDS is a valid and reliable screening instrument with good internal consistency with Cronbach’s alpha of 0.82 and a sensitivity of 79.2% and 78.2%.”
MethodInfluentialStoner, M. C. D., Mathebula, F., Sedze, N., Seyama, L., Mohuba, R., Fabiano, Z., Etima, J., Young, A. M., Scheckter, R., van der Straten, A., et al. (2024) · AIDS and Behavior · doi:10.1007/s10461-024-04321-2 · Cited by 2
Levels of Exclusive Breastfeeding and Correlates At 10 weeks Post- Delivery in A Rural Setting
Ogah, A. O., Ogah, J.-A., & Ogah, E. E. (2026) · International journal of research and scientific innovation · doi:10.51244/ijrsi.2026.1305000099 · Cited by 2
Prevalence of Postpartum Depression among Mothers in the Emirates of Abu Dhabi
Ahbabi, S. A., Mubarak, G., Khaldi, S. A., Mousa, A. B., & AlKetbi, L. B. (2024) · Maternal and Child Health Journal · doi:10.1007/s10995-024-03931-5 · Cited by 2
“The main part of the questionnaire was the Edinburgh Post Partum Scale EPDS, which is the tool used to assess postpartum depression (Cox et al., 1987 ; Levis et al., 2020).”
BackgroundMethodNeda-Stepan, O., Giurgi-Oncu, C., Sălcudean, A., Bernad, E. S., Bernad, B.-C., Boeriu, E., & ENĂTESCU, V. R. (2024) · Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.3390/bs14070589 · Cited by 2
Perinatal depression and labour anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic in Poland
Plewka, M. K., Margulska, A., Sójta, K., Płeska, K., & Gawlik-Kotelnicka, O. (2024) · Psychiatria i Psychologia Kliniczna · doi:10.15557/pipk.2024.0005 · Cited by 2
Costello, L., Ziegler, K. M., McCormack, L. A., Akbaryan, A., Vargas, J. C., Harris, W. S., Jackson, K. H., Barber, M., Morales, S., Elliott, A., et al. (2024) · BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth · doi:10.1186/s12884-024-06732-4 · Cited by 2
“Using well-established cutoff scores [63, 67] we observed 8.1% of pregnant persons had mild or moderate depressive symptoms (EPDS ≥ 11) [63], 5.7% of pregnant persons had mild or moderate state anxiety symptoms (STAI state scale ≥ 40) [67], and 13.8% of pregnant persons had mild or moderate trait…”
MethodInfluentialScroggins, J. K., Topaz, M., Min, S. H., & Barcelona, V. (2024) · Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic & Neonatal Nursing · doi:10.1016/j.jogn.2024.07.004 · Cited by 2
Poćwierz-Marciniak, I., Bieleninik, Ł., Cruz, J. B., Ardila, Y. M. B., Jassem-Bobowicz, J. M., Malaver, S. A. H., Díaz, A. M., Reina, N. N. M., de la Barrera, L. I. M., Gaona, A. J. C., et al. (2024) · Health Psychology Report · doi:10.5114/hpr/190886 · Cited by 2
“The risk of postnatal depression will be measured using the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) developed by Cox et al. (1987), which is the most commonly used depression screening tool in clinical practice and research (Levis et al., 2020).”
MethodThe impact of the early COVID-19 pandemic on maternal mental health during pregnancy and postpartum
Bartmann, C., Kimmel, T., Dávidová, P., Kalok, M., Essel, C., Ahmed, F. B., McNeill, R. V., Wolfgang, T., Reif, A., Bahlmann, F., et al. (2024) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0310902 · Cited by 2
Holland, M. L., Fitch, D. J., Regmi, D., & Sadler, L. S. (2024) · Prevention Science · doi:10.1007/s11121-024-01731-5 · Cited by 2
“For the EPDS, the threshold of 10 is associated with a sensitivity of 0.85 and a specificity of 0.84 (Levis et al., 2020).”
BackgroundInfluentialMetabolic profiling of blood plasma in depression in pregnant women during early pregnancy
Yang, H., Jia, S., Guo, X., Chen, J., & Zou, T. (2024) · Australasian Psychiatry · doi:10.1177/10398562241286679 · Cited by 2
Nguyen, H.-C., Dung, L. P., Quyet, N. T., Hoang, H. N., Tran, M. N. P., & Phượng, L. T. (2024) · Y HOC TP HO CHI MINH · doi:10.32895/ump.mpr.8.4.29 · Cited by 2
“The cut-off threshold for PPD classi - fication in this study was set at 12/13, a clinically diagnosed standard with high specificity [16,17].”
BackgroundMatumadi, I. U., Caorong, L. A., & Bangcola, A. A. (2024) · Journal of Healthcare Administration · doi:10.33546/joha.3602 · Cited by 2
Abukhalaf, D., Koerner, R., Sapna Patel, M. C., Duffy, A., & Prescott, S. M. (2024) · Comprehensive Psychoneuroendocrinology · doi:10.1016/j.cpnec.2024.100280 · Cited by 2
“This instrument has demonstrated evidence of reliability and validity for measuring depressive symptoms during pregnancy [47].”
Epee-Bounya, A., Mari, E., Seals, J.-L., Regan, S., & Rea, C. J. (2025) · Pediatric Quality and Safety · doi:10.1097/pq9.0000000000000802 · Cited by 2
Roberge, P., Vasiliadis, H., Chapdelaine, A., Battista, M., Beaulieu, M., Chomienne, M., Cumyn, A., Drapeau, M., Durand, C., Girard, A., et al. (2025) · BMC Psychiatry · doi:10.1186/s12888-025-06636-3 · Cited by 2
Rajabi, A. A., Alkatheeri, H., Hijazi, R., & Kennedy, L. (2025) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-94912-3 · Cited by 7
“Despite this, EDPS is globally recognized as a reliable and valid measure of PPD, furthermore, it has been successfully used by retrospective studies, to determine PPD and appears to be stable with time 27,39–41 .”
Trajectories of depressive symptoms of mothers and fathers over 11 years
Csajbók, Z., Fořt, J., & Kearns, P. B. (2025) · Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences · doi:10.1017/s2045796025000174 · Cited by 2
Levy, M., Berger, A., Egotubov, A., Gordon‐Hacker, A., Sheiner, E., & Gueron‐Sela, N. (2025) · Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology · doi:10.1007/s10802-025-01332-y · Cited by 2
“‘) and has also been validated for use with preg - nant women (Levis et al., 2020 ).”
Brookman, R., Conti, J., Harris, S. A., Grant, K., & Kalashnikova, M. (2025) · BMC Psychology · doi:10.1186/s40359-025-02829-3 · Cited by 2
“The 10-item EPDS is the most frequently used depression screening tool in perinatal care; with the most common cut-off values of 10 or higher and 13 or higher [55–59].”
Evidence for missed cases of postpartum depression based on paediatric clinical care screenings
White, L. K., Perlstein, S., Gorgone, A., Himes, M. M., Kornfield, S. L., Shanmugan, S., Weitz, E. S., Njoroge, W., Duncan, A. F., Burris, H. H., et al. (2025) · The British Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1192/bjp.2025.81 · Cited by 2
Zimmermann, M., Schaefer, A. J., Tong, X. J., Palmer, S. J., Millen, L., Arowosegbe, A., Julce, C., Simas, T. A. M., Sheldrick, R. C., Mackie, T. I., et al. (2025) · Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology · doi:10.1080/02646838.2025.2587670 · Cited by 2
Kulkarni, A. U., Kothiwale, T. D., & Moras, E. T. (2023) · International Journal of Reproduction Contraception Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20231913 · Cited by 2
Math Matters: Why Positive Screening Rates Cannot Substitute for Prevalence
Sheldrick, R. C., & Barnett, M. L. (2021) · Academic Pediatrics · doi:10.1016/j.acap.2021.10.013 · Cited by 2
Nillni, Y. I., Crowe, H. M., Yland, J. J., Wesselink, A. K., & Wise, L. A. (2022) · Annals of Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.annepidem.2022.07.008 · Cited by 2
Risk factors for postpartum depression among sexual minority and heterosexual parents
Harari, L. H., Blasbalg, U., Arnon, S., Ben-Sheetrit, J., & Toren, P. (2022) · Australasian Psychiatry · doi:10.1177/10398562221133990 · Cited by 2
“Our data suggest the dominance of the social factor, that is, parental role, over the hormonal factor, that is, pregnancy, in the development of PPD.”
MethodInfluentialFrank, O., Murphy, M. S. Q., Talarico, R., Denize, K. M., Boisvert, C., Dingwall‐Harvey, A. L. J., White, R. R., Corsi, D. J., Sampsel, K., Wen, S. W., et al. (2023) · Journal of Substance Use · doi:10.1080/14659891.2023.2183148 · Cited by 2
“Almost 30% of the participants in this study screened positive for postpartum depression (as defined by the EPDS), far above the estimated 12% prevalence rate established in systematic reviews (Shorey et al., 2018).”
MethodInfluentialAyrout, R. A., Kookash, M. H., Ashabi, K. K. A., Safiah, M. H., & Latifeh, Y. (2023) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3154302/v1 · Cited by 2
Perinatal Shifts in Fecal-Derived Metabolites and Associations with Postpartum DepressionPreprint
Longoria, K. D., Wright, M. L., Lewis, K., Garcia, S. R., Franco‐Rocha, O. Y., Dube, S., Nguyen, T. C., Flowers, E., & Widen, E. M. (2025) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/2025.09.25.678627 · Cited by 2
“The EPDS is a 10-item self-report questionnaire widely used in clinical practice and research to screen for PPD symptoms (Cox et al., 1987; Levis et al., 2020; Moyer et al., 2023).”
Depressionen in der Schwangerschaft
Lanczik, F., Fiedler, K., & Kittel‐Schneider, S. (2023) · PSYCH up2date · doi:10.1055/a-2044-8033 · Cited by 1
Maternal depressive symptoms during pregnancy and infant wheezing up to 2 years of age
van Gelder, M. M. H. J., van Wijk, E. J. C., Roukema, J., Roeleveld, N., Verhaak, C. M., & Merkus, P. J. F. M. (2023) · Annals of Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.annepidem.2023.11.004 · Cited by 1
Cunningham, S. D., Lindberg, S. M., Joinson, C. J., Shoham, D. A., Chu, H., Newman, D. K., Epperson, N., Brubaker, L. T., Low, L. K., Camenga, D. R., et al. (2024) · Journal of Wound Ostomy and Continence Nursing · doi:10.1097/won.0000000000001039 · Cited by 1
Helmer, C. S. (2024) · Linköping University medical dissertations · doi:10.3384/9789180754934 · Cited by 1
Associação entre trauma na infância e depressão pós-parto em puérperas brasileiras
Júnior, E. B. C., Andrade, A. C. D. S., Fernandes, M. N. D. F., & Gherardi‐Donato, E. C. D. S. (2024) · Revista Latino-Americana de Enfermagem · doi:10.1590/1518-8345.6761.4171 · Cited by 1
Appleton, J., Reilly, N. M., Fowler, C., Elliott, D., & Denney‐Wilson, E. (2024) · Applied Nursing Research · doi:10.1016/j.apnr.2024.151812 · Cited by 1
Kohlhoff, J. R., Karlov, L., Dadds, M. R., Barnett, B. E. W., Silove, D. M., & Eapen, V. (2024) · Infant Mental Health Journal · doi:10.1002/imhj.22129 · Cited by 1
Uzun, A., Öztürk, G. Z., Demir, İ., Aksu, S. B., Bozkurt, Z., & Çavuşoğlu, M. (2024) · Eurasian Journal of Family Medicine · doi:10.33880/ejfm.2024130301 · Cited by 1
Call For Action: The Obstetrician's Role In Peripartum Mental Health
Chauhan, A. R., & Chauhan, A. R. (2024) · The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India · doi:10.1007/s13224-024-02076-3 · Cited by 1
Hahn, L., Thomann, M., Dreyer, E.-M., Beyer, S., Ehmann, L., Ganster, F., Topalov, N. E., Keckstein, S., Mahner, S., Kolben, T., et al. (2024) · Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics · doi:10.1007/s00404-024-07851-1 · Cited by 1
Mental health during and after pregnancy in medically assisted reproduction: a danish cohort study
Grønlund, M. M., Jølving, L. R., Möller, S., Wesselhoeft, R. T., & Bliddal, M. (2025) · Archives of Women s Mental Health · doi:10.1007/s00737-024-01553-y · Cited by 1
“A high level of postnatal depres - sion symptoms was defined as having a total score ≥ 11, as this cut-off has been found to maximize the combined sensi - tivity and specificity (Levis et al. 2020).”
Prenatal Cannabis Use and Depressive Symptoms
Pitt, T. L., Allshouse, A. A., Kim, P., McMillin, G. A., Silver, R. M., Chung, J. M., Grobman, W. A., Haas, D. M., Mercer, B. M., Parry, S. I., et al. (2025) · Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000005860 · Cited by 1
Healing hearts: mind-body therapy for mothers after stillbirth’s silent grief
Bar, V., Hermesh, T., Reshef, P., Hermetz, S., Hertz‐Palmor, N., Gothelf, D., & Mosheva, M. (2025) · Frontiers in Psychiatry · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2025.1534616 · Cited by 2
Hahn, L., Dreyer, E.-M., Thomann, M., Beyer, S., Ehmann, L., Ganster, F., Jegen, M., Mahner, S., Kolben, T., & Meister, S. (2025) · Breastfeeding Medicine · doi:10.1089/bfm.2024.0315 · Cited by 1
“…the EPDS differed descriptively over time depending on the breastfeeding mode, most notably, a lower risk of PPD associated with full breastfeeding until postpartum week 16, supporting the existing literature suggesting a positive association between PPD risk and the duration of breastfeeding.”
Vanderkruik, R. C., Freeman, M. P., Gaw, M. L., Reuman, A. R. L., Verghese, M., Louis, C. C., Jellinek, M. S., Bartels, S. J., & Cohen, L. S. (2025) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0319181 · Cited by 1
Validation of the food craving acceptance and action questionnaire (FAAQ) in pregnancy
Hormes, J. M., & Timko, C. A. (2025) · Eating Behaviors · doi:10.1016/j.eatbeh.2025.101974 · Cited by 1
Ke, Z., Zhang, Y., Cai, B., Luo, J., Ma, Y., Chen, Q., & Deng, L. (2025) · Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment · doi:10.2147/ndt.s516355 · Cited by 1
“35,36 Secondary Outcomes The SAS is commonly used for assessing anxiety, which includes psychological and somatic symptoms evaluation in a total of 20 items assessed with point scale ranging from 1 to 4.”
Yimer, N. B., Beňová, L., Gebremedhin, S., Mirkuzie, A. H., Zelalem, M., Fellmeth, G. L., & Asefa, A. (2025) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-93342-5 · Cited by 1
“We used this cut-off due to its higher combined sensitivity and specificity according to a recent meta-analysis of 58 studies 25 .”
Peripartum depression and contributing factors: An observational study
Zafer, E., Okkuşcu, T., Ercan, S. K., & Seyhan, N. A. (2025) · Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi · doi:10.22312/sdusbed.1653821 · Cited by 1
Postpartum depression and associated factors among women visiting postnatal clinic in Ethiopia
Ousman, S. K. (2025) · The Ethiopian journal of reproductive health. · doi:10.69614/ejrh.v17i01.857 · Cited by 1
Resilience of pregnant Polish women during the war between Ukraine and Russia
Błaszczyk, Z., Wyrzychowski, A., Plewka, M. K., Nowakowska‐Domagała, K., Strzelecki, D., & Gawlik-Kotelnicka, O. (2025) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-01108-w · Cited by 1
“Resilience is considered as both a mediator and moderator between stress exposure and symptoms of anxiety and depression 30,31 .”
Dreams and Nightmares in Early Pregnancy: A Comparative Study with a Control Group
Scarpelli, S., Spinoni, M., Gorgoni, M., Lasaponara, S., Ciolli, P., Rech, F., Muzio, M. D., Med, C., Benedetti, I. D. P., Grano, C., et al. (2025) · Nature and Science of Sleep · doi:10.2147/nss.s520737 · Cited by 2
Zhou, X., Sun, C., Cai, Z., Li, L., Wu, Y., Zhang, H., Raat, H., Alexis Medina, D., & Zhou, H. (2025) · Frontiers in Psychiatry · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2025.1507991 · Cited by 2
Druggable Targets for Postpartum Depression: A Mendelian Randomization and Colocalization Study
Wu, S., Shen, M., Wang, H., & Zhou, W. (2025) · Cellular and Molecular Neurobiology · doi:10.1007/s10571-025-01581-x · Cited by 1
“However, research has found that the sensitivity and specificity of the EPDS vary significantly across different studies, particularly due to the influence of cultural background and language differences (Levis et al. 2020).”
Distributed lag interaction model with index modification
Demateis, D., Aldana, S. I., Wright, R. O., Wright, R. J., Baccarelli, A., Colicino, E., Wilson, A., & Keller, K. P. (2024) · Biostatistics · doi:10.1093/biostatistics/kxaf017 · Cited by 1
Boyles, S. L., Weinstein, S. R., Bell, A. F., & Erickson, E. N. (2025) · Journal of Midwifery & Women s Health · doi:10.1111/jmwh.13781 · Cited by 1
Li, Y., Huang, H., Sun, Z., Yu, M., Xie, Q., Wang, X., Wang, X., Li, Y., & Li, Y. (2025) · Midwifery · doi:10.1016/j.midw.2025.104538 · Cited by 1
Höhn, I., Hernadi, A., Zihlmann, R., Coelius, C., Walter, K., Hamza, A., Ochsenbein‐Kölble, N., & Schäffer, L. (2025) · Swiss Medical Weekly · doi:10.57187/s.3894 · Cited by 1
Youshaa, M., van der Waerden, J. E. B., Zoumenou, R., Massougbodji, A., Boivin, M. J., Bodeau‐Livinec, F., & Marr, K. (2025) · Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology · doi:10.1007/s00127-025-02982-5 · Cited by 1
Assessment of prenatal depression among pregnant nurses in Punjab, Pakistan: A cross-sectional study
Shafi, N., Shahid, N., Arshad, M., Iqbal, M. S., Mustafa, G., Ul‐Rahman, A., & Raza, M. A. (2025) · Midwifery · doi:10.1016/j.midw.2025.104570 · Cited by 1
Stanton, A. M., Fertig, M. R., Githaiga, J. N., Ashar, D. A., Gwangqa, L., Onverwacht, M., Knight, L., Myer, L., Haberer, J. E., Joska, J. A., et al. (2025) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph22091350 · Cited by 1
Nagenthiran, L., Rahman, F. N. A., Mahadevan, R., Zainuddin, A. A., & Sutan, R. (2025) · Frontiers in Psychiatry · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2025.1574094 · Cited by 1
Roberts, E., Francesconi, M., & Flouri, E. (2025) · Stress · doi:10.1080/10253890.2025.2553135 · Cited by 1
“…et al., 2020), and maternal depression (at 32 weeks of pregnancy) (liu et al., 2017; Naudé et al., 2022; stone et al., 2015), measured using the edinburgh Postnatal Depression scale (levis et al., 2020). sex and ethnicity were dichotomously coded as male and female, and white and non-white.”
Mathew, S., Lund, C., & Seward, N. (2025) · Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology · doi:10.1007/s00127-025-02986-1 · Cited by 1
Towards a transdiagnostic approach to psychopathology in the postpartum period
Froelich, J. M., & Gerstein, E. D. (2025) · Clinical Psychology Review · doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2025.102646 · Cited by 1
Comparison of the ACE-Q and CTES: A study of childhood trauma and perinatal depression
McDonald, M., Martin, D., Alhusen, J. L., & Payne, J. L. (2025) · Journal of Affective Disorders · doi:10.1016/j.jad.2025.120223 · Cited by 1
Chrzan‐Dętkoś, M., Murawska, N., Łockiewicz, M., & Studzińska, M. (2025) · Infant Mental Health Journal · doi:10.1002/imhj.70044 · Cited by 1
Comparing the Prevalence of Anxiety and Depressive Symptoms During Pregnancy
Koerner, R., Rinaldi, K., Valente, O., Duffy, A., & Rechenberg, K. (2025) · Journal of Psychosocial Nursing and Mental Health Services · doi:10.3928/02793695-20250930-03 · Cited by 1
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
