Amanuel Alemu Abajobir1, Joemer Calderon Maravilla2, Rosa Alati3, Jackob Moses Najman4. 1. School of Public Health, The University of Queensland, Australia. Electronic address: amanuel.abajobir@uqconnect.edu.au. 2. School of Public Health, The University of Queensland, Australia. 3. School of Public Health, The University of Queensland, Australia; Centre for Youth Substance Abuse Research, The University of Queensland, Australia. 4. School of Public Health, The University of Queensland, Australia; School of Social Sciences, The University of Queensland, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is a growing interest in exploring maternal mental health effects of unintended pregnancies carried to term. However, the evidence base from a small number of available studies is characterised by considerable variability, inconsistency and inconclusive findings. We present a systematic review and meta-analysis of all available studies on unintended pregnancy as these are related to maternal depression. METHODS: Using PRISMA guideline, we systematically reviewed and meta-analysed studies reporting an association between unintended pregnancy and maternal depression from PubMed, EMBASE, PsychINFO and Google Scholar. We used a priori set criteria and included details of quality and magnitude of effect sizes. Sample sizes, adjusted odds ratios and standard errors were extracted. Random effects were used to calculate pooled estimates in Stata 13. Cochran's Q, I(2) and meta-bias statistics assessed heterogeneity and publication bias of included studies. RESULTS: Meta-bias and funnel plot of inverse variance detected no publication bias. Overall prevalence of maternal depression in unintended pregnancy was 21%. Unintended pregnancy was significantly associated with maternal depression. Despite statistically significant heterogeneities of included studies, sub-group analyses revealed positive and significant associations by types of unintended pregnancies, timing of measurements with respect to pregnancy and childbirth, study designs and settings. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of perinatal depression is two-fold in women with unintended pregnancy. Perinatal care settings may screen pregnancy intention and depression of women backed by integrating family planning and mental health services.
BACKGROUND: There is a growing interest in exploring maternal mental health effects of unintended pregnancies carried to term. However, the evidence base from a small number of available studies is characterised by considerable variability, inconsistency and inconclusive findings. We present a systematic review and meta-analysis of all available studies on unintended pregnancy as these are related to maternal depression. METHODS: Using PRISMA guideline, we systematically reviewed and meta-analysed studies reporting an association between unintended pregnancy and maternal depression from PubMed, EMBASE, PsychINFO and Google Scholar. We used a priori set criteria and included details of quality and magnitude of effect sizes. Sample sizes, adjusted odds ratios and standard errors were extracted. Random effects were used to calculate pooled estimates in Stata 13. Cochran's Q, I(2) and meta-bias statistics assessed heterogeneity and publication bias of included studies. RESULTS:Meta-bias and funnel plot of inverse variance detected no publication bias. Overall prevalence of maternal depression in unintended pregnancy was 21%. Unintended pregnancy was significantly associated with maternal depression. Despite statistically significant heterogeneities of included studies, sub-group analyses revealed positive and significant associations by types of unintended pregnancies, timing of measurements with respect to pregnancy and childbirth, study designs and settings. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of perinatal depression is two-fold in women with unintended pregnancy. Perinatal care settings may screen pregnancy intention and depression of women backed by integrating family planning and mental health services.
Authors: Adam K Lewkowitz; Joshua I Rosenbloom; Matt Keller; Julia D López; George A Macones; Margaret A Olsen; Alison G Cahill Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2019-06-19 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Jessica N Sanders; Kyl Myers; Lori M Gawron; Rebecca G Simmons; David K Turok Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2018-02-22 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Charlan D Kroelinger; Isabel A Morgan; Carla L DeSisto; Cameron Estrich; Lisa F Waddell; Christine Mackie; Ellen Pliska; David A Goodman; Shanna Cox; Alisa Velonis; Kristin M Rankin Journal: J Womens Health (Larchmt) Date: 2018-11-02 Impact factor: 2.681