5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Effect of adverse perinatal outcomes on postpartum maternal mental health in low-income and middle-income countries: a protocol for systematic review

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction

          More than three-fourths of adverse perinatal outcomes (preterm, small for gestational age, low birth weight, congenital anomalies, stillbirth and neonatal death) occur in low-income and middle-income countries. These adverse perinatal outcomes can have both short-term and long-term consequences on maternal mental health. Even though there are few empirical studies on the effect of perinatal loss on maternal mental illness, comprehensive information on the impact of adverse perinatal outcomes in resource-limited settings is scarce. Therefore, we aim to systematically review and synthesise evidence on the effect of adverse perinatal outcomes on maternal mental health.

          Methods and analysis

          The primary outcome of our review will be postpartum maternal mental illness (anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder and postpartum psychosis) following adverse perinatal outcomes. All peer-reviewed primary studies published in English will be retrieved from databases: PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL Ultimate (EBSCO), PsycINFO, Embase, Scopus and Global Health through the three main searching terms—adverse perinatal outcomes, maternal mental illness and settings, with a variant of subject headings and keywords. We will follow the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklist to assess the quality of the studies we are including. The review findings will be reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 statement. Estimate-based meta-analysis will be performed. We will assess heterogeneity between studies using the I 2 statistics and publication bias will be checked using funnel plots and Egger’s test. A subgroup analysis will be conducted to explore potential sources of heterogeneity (if available). Finally, the certainty of the evidence will be evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.

          Ethics and dissemination

          Since this systematic review does not involve human participants, ethical approval is not required. The review will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.

          PROSPERO registration number

          CRD42023405980.

          Related collections

          Most cited references48

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Rayyan—a web and mobile app for systematic reviews

          Background Synthesis of multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in a systematic review can summarize the effects of individual outcomes and provide numerical answers about the effectiveness of interventions. Filtering of searches is time consuming, and no single method fulfills the principal requirements of speed with accuracy. Automation of systematic reviews is driven by a necessity to expedite the availability of current best evidence for policy and clinical decision-making. We developed Rayyan (http://rayyan.qcri.org), a free web and mobile app, that helps expedite the initial screening of abstracts and titles using a process of semi-automation while incorporating a high level of usability. For the beta testing phase, we used two published Cochrane reviews in which included studies had been selected manually. Their searches, with 1030 records and 273 records, were uploaded to Rayyan. Different features of Rayyan were tested using these two reviews. We also conducted a survey of Rayyan’s users and collected feedback through a built-in feature. Results Pilot testing of Rayyan focused on usability, accuracy against manual methods, and the added value of the prediction feature. The “taster” review (273 records) allowed a quick overview of Rayyan for early comments on usability. The second review (1030 records) required several iterations to identify the previously identified 11 trials. The “suggestions” and “hints,” based on the “prediction model,” appeared as testing progressed beyond five included studies. Post rollout user experiences and a reflexive response by the developers enabled real-time modifications and improvements. The survey respondents reported 40% average time savings when using Rayyan compared to others tools, with 34% of the respondents reporting more than 50% time savings. In addition, around 75% of the respondents mentioned that screening and labeling studies as well as collaborating on reviews to be the two most important features of Rayyan. As of November 2016, Rayyan users exceed 2000 from over 60 countries conducting hundreds of reviews totaling more than 1.6M citations. Feedback from users, obtained mostly through the app web site and a recent survey, has highlighted the ease in exploration of searches, the time saved, and simplicity in sharing and comparing include-exclude decisions. The strongest features of the app, identified and reported in user feedback, were its ability to help in screening and collaboration as well as the time savings it affords to users. Conclusions Rayyan is responsive and intuitive in use with significant potential to lighten the load of reviewers.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews

            The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update to the guideline. The PRISMA 2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes new reporting guidance that reflects advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies. The structure and presentation of the items have been modified to facilitate implementation. In this article, we present the PRISMA 2020 27-item checklist, an expanded checklist that details reporting recommendations for each item, the PRISMA 2020 abstract checklist, and the revised flow diagrams for original and updated reviews.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Book: not found

              Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Open
                bmjopen
                bmjopen
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2044-6055
                2023
                12 December 2023
                : 13
                : 12
                : e074447
                Affiliations
                [1 ]departmentDepartment of Health Systems and Policy , Ringgold_128166University of Gondar , Gondar, Ethiopia
                [2 ]departmentMenzies School of Health Research , Ringgold_10095Charles Darwin University , Casuarina, Northern Territory, Australia
                [3 ]Ringgold_587551Addis Continental Institute of Public Health , Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Samrawit Mihret Fetene; samrimih21@ 123456gmail.com
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6312-0267
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7076-6146
                Article
                bmjopen-2023-074447
                10.1136/bmjopen-2023-074447
                10729045
                38101849
                5ad715c2-21a9-4da5-adc4-f188b8dff412
                © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

                This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See:  http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

                History
                : 06 April 2023
                : 20 November 2023
                Categories
                Mental Health
                1506
                1712
                Protocol
                Custom metadata
                unlocked

                Medicine
                mental health,postpartum women,anxiety disorders,depression & mood disorders
                Medicine
                mental health, postpartum women, anxiety disorders, depression & mood disorders

                Comments

                Comment on this article