Search

BackgroundWomen experience changes both physically and psychologically during their transition to motherhood. The postnatal period is a critical time for women to develop maternal self-efficacy. Mobile health interventions may offer a way to reach women during this critical period to offer support and information. Essential Coaching for Every Mother is a text message program that seeks to educate and support women during the first 6 weeks postpartum. ObjectiveThe primary effectiveness objective is to compare the effectiveness of the Essential Coaching for Every Mother program on maternal psychosocial outcomes (self-efficacy, social support, postpartum depression, and postpartum anxiety) immediately after the intervention and 6 months postpartum, collectively as well as stratified by parity. The primary implementation objective is to evaluate the implementation extent and quality of the Essential Coaching for Every Mother program. MethodsThis will be a hybrid type 1 effectiveness-implementation randomized controlled trial. A total of 140 mothers-to-be or new mothers from Nova Scotia will be recruited and randomized to the intervention or control arm, stratified by parity. The intervention arm will receive the Essential Coaching for Every Mother program, which consists of 53 messages sent twice a day for the first 2 weeks and daily for weeks 3 through 6. The control group will receive usual care. Messages are personalized based on the infant’s age and the woman’s self-selected preference for breastfeeding or formula feeding and tailored with the infant’s name and gender. Women can enroll in the program if they are ≥37 weeks pregnant or within 10 days postpartum, with the first message designed to be sent on the second evening after birth. The actual number of messages received will vary based on the timing of enrollment and the infant’s date of birth. Participants will complete questionnaires assessing self-efficacy, social support, and postpartum depression and anxiety at baseline (enrollment after birth) and 6 weeks (postintervention) and 6 months postpartum. Implementation data will be collected throughout the trial, and evaluation feedback will be collected at 6 weeks from women who received the intervention. ResultsRecruitment for this study started on January 5, 2021, and is currently ongoing, with an anticipated date of recruitment completion of January 2022. ConclusionsThis study will assess the effectiveness of a postpartum text message program to improve maternal self-efficacy and social support while decreasing postpartum depression and anxiety. It will also shed light on the implementation effectiveness of the program. Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04730570; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04730570 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)DERR1-10.2196/27138

BackgroundParents of preterm infants increasingly use their mobile phone to search for health information. In a recent review, websites targeted toward parents with infants in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) were found to have poor to moderate quality educational material; however, there is a dearth of literature regarding mobile apps for NICU parents. ObjectiveThis study aimed to identify and evaluate apps targeting parents of infants in the NICU for quality of information, usability, and credibility. MethodsWe systematically searched the Apple App Store and Google Play using 49 key terms (eg, “preterm infant”) from July 26 to August 18, 2017. English apps targeting NICU parents that cost less than $20 were included. Apps for health care professionals, e-books/magazines, or nonrelevant results were excluded. In total, 3 tools were used for evaluation: Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS) to measure quality; Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool for Audiovisual Materials (PEMAT-AV) to measure the app’s content usability; and Trust it or Trash It to measure credibility. ResultsThe initial search yielded 6579 apps, with 49 apps eligible after title and description screening. In total, 27 apps met the eligibility criteria with 9 apps available in both app stores; of those, the app with the most recent update date was chosen to be included in the analysis. Thus, 18 unique apps were included for final analysis. Using MARS, 7 apps (7/18, 39%) received a good score on overall quality (ie, 4.0 out of 5.0), with none receiving an excellent score. In addition, 8 apps (8/18, 44%) received a PEMAT-AV score between 51% and 75% on the understandability subscale, and 8 apps (8/18, 44%) scored between 76% and 100% on the actionability subscale. Trust It or Trash It deemed 13 apps (13/18, 72%) as trash for reasons including no identification of sources or lack of current information, with only 5 (5/18, 28%) deemed trustworthy. Reviewer’s expert evaluation found 16 apps contained content that matched information provided by multiple sources; however, most apps did not meet other objective measurement items to support credibility. When comparing the MARS overall quality and subjective quality scores with trustworthiness of apps, there was no statistically significant difference. A statistically significant difference was found between the 2 MARS quality scores, indicating that, on average, apps were ranked significantly lower on subjective quality compared with overall quality measures. ConclusionsThis evaluation revealed that of the available apps targeting NICU parents, less than half should be considered as acceptable educational material. Over two-thirds of the apps were found to have issues regarding credibility and just over a quarter were considered good quality. The apps currently available for NICU parents are lacking and of concern in terms of quality and credibility.

BackgroundHealth researchers are increasingly using social media in a professional capacity, and the applications of social media for health researchers are vast. However, there is currently no published evidence synthesis of the ways in which health researchers use social media professionally, and uncertainty remains as to how best to harness its potential.ObjectiveThis scoping review aimed to explore how social media is used by health researchers professionally, as reported in the literature.MethodsThe scoping review methodology guided by Arksey and O'Malley and Levac et al was used. Comprehensive searches based on the concepts of health research and social media were conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ERIC, and Web of Science databases, with no limitations applied. Articles were screened at the title and abstract level and at full text by two reviewers. One reviewer extracted data that were analyzed descriptively to map the available evidence.ResultsA total of 8359 articles were screened at the title and abstract level, of which 719 were also assessed at full text for eligibility. The 414 articles identified for inclusion were published in 278 different journals. Studies originated from 31 different countries, with the most prevalent being the United States (52.7% [218/414]). The health discipline of the first authors varied, with medicine (33.3% [138/414]) being the most common. A third of the articles covered health generally, with 61 health-specific topics. Papers used a range of social media platforms (mean 1.33 [SD 0.7]). A quarter of the articles screened reported on social media use for participant recruitment (25.1% [104/414]), followed by practical ways to use social media (15.5% [64/414]), and use of social media for content analysis research (13.3% [55/414]). Articles were categorized as celebratory (ie, opportunities for engagement, 72.2% [299/414]), contingent (ie, opportunities and possible limitations, 22.7% [94/414]) and concerned (ie, potentially harmful, 5.1% [21/414]).ConclusionsHealth researchers are increasingly publishing on their use of social media for a range of professional purposes. Although most of the sentiment around the use of social media in health research was celebratory, the uses of social media varied widely. Future research is needed to support health researchers to optimize their social media use.

Chronic pain, defined as persistent or recurring pain or pain lasting longer than 3 months, is a common childhood problem. The objective of this study was to conduct an updated systematic review and meta-analysis on the prevalence of chronic pain (ie, overall, headache, abdominal pain, back pain, musculoskeletal pain, multisite/general pain, and other) in children and adolescents. EMBASE, PubMed, CINAHL, and PsycINFO were searched for publications between January 1, 2009, and June 30, 2023. Studies reporting population-based estimates of chronic nondisease related pain prevalence in children or adolescents (age ≤ 19 years) were included. Two independent reviewers screened articles based on a priori protocol. One hundred nineteen studies with a total of 1,043,878 children (52.0% female, mean age 13.4 years [SD 2.4]) were included. Seventy different countries were represented, with the highest number of data points of prevalence estimates coming from Finland and Germany (n = 19 each, 4.3%). The overall prevalence of chronic pain in children and adolescents was 20.8%, with the highest prevalence for headache and musculoskeletal pain (25.7%). Overall, and for all types of pain except for back pain and musculoskeletal pain, there were significant differences in the prevalence between boys and girls, with girls having a higher prevalence of pain. There was high heterogeneity (I2 99.9%). Overall risk of bias was low to moderate. In summary, approximately 1 in 5 children and adolescents experience chronic pain and prevalence varies by pain type; for most types, there is higher pain prevalence among girls than among boys. Findings echo and expand upon the systematic review conducted in 2011. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The objective of this scoping review was to map the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the paternal parenting experience. Studies published between January 2020 and October 2021 reporting on paternal mental health, interparental relations, and child interactions were eligible. Forty studies from 17 different countries were included. Most studies included data from both mothers and fathers (83%); five studies reported data from fathers only, and three examined same-sex partners. Most commonly reported outcomes included division of childcare activities (n = 14), delegation of household tasks (n = 10), depression (n = 12), and stress (n = 9). The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on fathers varied globally with no clear trends except for the division of childcare and household tasks, in which fathers increased their contribution to childcare and household tasks yet mothers continued to experience a higher domestic burden. Further research is recommended to advance our understanding of how fathers coped during the COVID-19 pandemic and document the long-term impact of the pandemic on families. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To analyze the characteristics and trends in published research on perinatal depression between 1920 and 2020. Methods: A search strategy in Web of Science identified all published literature on perinatal depression between January 1, 1920, and December 31, 2020. Output from Web of Science was used to analyze bibliometric information, and VOSViewer was used to visualize the networks of linkages between identified publications. Results: There were 16,961 publications identified. Among these publications, there were 82,726 unique authors and 140 countries represented. The United States had the highest frequency of publications (44.6%). Most publications (69.8%) occurred between 2011 and 2020, with the first publication identified in 1928. There were 2197 unique journals identified, with over half publishing only one (n = 948, 43.2%) or two relevant publications (n = 314, 14.3%). Authors with the largest number of publications were Wisner (n = 115), Dennis (n = 95), and Murray (n = 92), while authors with the largest number of citations were Cox (n = 7225), Murray (n = 2755), and O'Hara (n = 2069). Limitations: While the Web of Science is a representative database identifying the greatest number of relevant articles, it may be unrepresentative of all published literature. Conclusion: This is the first study mapping publications on perinatal depression between 1920 and 2020. The rate of publication on perinatal depression has been steadily increasing in recent years with a wide variety of authors, countries, and journals represented. As the field continues to grow, trends may shift as early career researchers emerge and the importance of mental health in low‐income countries is prioritized. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]