↓ Skip to main content

Positive postpartum depression screening practices and subsequent mental health treatment for low-income women in Western countries: a systematic literature review

Overview of attention for article published in Public Health Reviews, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
176 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Positive postpartum depression screening practices and subsequent mental health treatment for low-income women in Western countries: a systematic literature review
Published in
Public Health Reviews, January 2017
DOI 10.1186/s40985-017-0050-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elinor Hansotte, Shirley I. Payne, Suzanne M. Babich

Abstract

Left undiagnosed and/or untreated, the short-and long-term sequelae of postpartum depression may negatively impact both mother and child. In Western countries, access to mental health care is influenced by socioeconomic factors. The objective of this systematic literature review is to compile factors that hinder and improve access to postpartum depression treatment in low-income women after a positive screen for postpartum depression. The key question of focus is: what are the characteristics associated with access to mental health treatment for low-income women with a positive postpartum depression screen in Western countries? A PRISMA-based systematic literature review was conducted of studies published in English before February 2016 that looked at treatment for postpartum depression in low-income women who had been identified with the condition. PubMed and EBSCO databases were searched using MESH and key terms and found 100 articles that met the selection criteria. After review by two independent researchers, 18 studies with 17 unique populations were included in the literature review. Two independent abstractors searched the included articles for themes surrounding impediments and advantages for low-income women identified with postpartum depression in obtaining mental health treatment. Characteristics of successful mental health treatment included studies that employed the use of a home visitor and those that separated outcomes for women with previous mental health treatment. Themes that emerged as treatment obstacles included cultural barriers, physical barriers, systemic health care barriers, and social barriers. This review will help to better inform screening and treatment priorities for those in the medical field who may encounter women experiencing postpartum depression and are not aware of the various barriers to care specific to low-income women. This review will also help policymakers identify specific obstacles that are not addressed in postpartum screening mandate policies which can affect the implementation of these policies.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 176 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 175 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 42 24%
Student > Bachelor 27 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 17 10%
Researcher 15 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 6%
Other 26 15%
Unknown 39 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 41 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 40 23%
Psychology 19 11%
Social Sciences 16 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 3%
Other 16 9%
Unknown 39 22%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 March 2018.
All research outputs
#2,148,618
of 12,695,728 outputs
Outputs from Public Health Reviews
#64
of 134 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,865
of 270,655 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Public Health Reviews
#3
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,695,728 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 134 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 270,655 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.