Antenatal depressive symptoms in Jamaica associated with limited perceived partner and other social support: A cross-sectional study

Omotayo Bernard, Roger C Gibson, Affette McCaw-Binns, Jody Reece, Charlene Coore-Desai, Sydonnie Shakespeare-Pellington and Maureen Samms-Vaughan

PLOS ONE, 2018, vol. 13, issue 3, 1-19

Abstract: Background: Antenatal depression is associated with adverse maternal and infant well-being. However, compared to postpartum depression, it has been less frequently explored globally or in Jamaica. This study aimed to determine the prevalence of, and factors associated with, antenatal depressive symptoms among Jamaican women in order to inform policy and build interventions that could improve their management and reduce their negative consequences. Methods: This secondary analysis of data from the second Jamaican Birth Cohort Study (JA-Kids Birth Cohort) included 3,517 women enrolled during pregnancy. Information was extracted from interviewer-administered questionnaires which recorded social, demographic, medical and obstetric information during pregnancy. The Edinburgh Postnatal Depression scale (EPDS) was used to screen for depression, with scores ≥13 considered indicative of a high likelihood of depression. Bivariate analysis examined associations between depressive symptoms and: age, income, financial difficulties, perceived social support, perceived partner infidelity, previous child-bearing unions and children with the current partner. Obstetric factors were also explored and included gravidity, prior adverse pregnancy outcome and complications from previous pregnancies. Variables that predicted the likelihood of depression based on an EPDS cut score of 13 were evaluated using logistic regression. Results: One in five participants (19.6%; 95% CI 18.3–20.9%) had a high likelihood of antenatal depression (EPDS ≥13). Significant predictors of high depressive symptom severity included four indicators of poor perceived social and partner support [ORs (95% CI) ranged from: 1.61 (1.07–2.43); p = 0.024 to 3.14(1.69–5.84); p

Date: 2018
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0194338 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 94338&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0194338

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0194338

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone ().