Background This systematic review aims to explore the prevalence of the impact of the COVID-19, MERS, and SARS pandemics on the mental health of pregnant women. Methods All COVID-19, SARS and MERS studies that evaluated the mental health of pregnant women with/without gynaecological conditions that were reported in English between December 2000 – July 2021 were included. The search criteria were developed based upon the research question using PubMed, Science Direct, Ovid PsycINFO and EMBASE databases. A wide search criterion was used to ensure the inclusion of all pregnant women with existing gynaecological conditions. The Newcastle-Ottawa-Scale was used to assess the risk of bias for all included studies. Random effects model with restricted maximum-likelihood estimation method was applied for the meta-analysis and I-square statistic was used to evaluate heterogeneity across studies. The pooled prevalence rates of symptoms of anxiety, depression, PTSD, stress, and sleep disorders with 95% confidence interval (CI) were computed. Results This systematic review identified 217 studies which included 638,889 pregnant women or women who had just given birth. There were no studies reporting the mental health impact due to MERS and SARS. Results showed that women who were pregnant or had just given birth displayed various symptoms of poor mental health including those relating to depression (24.9%), anxiety (32.8%), stress (29.44%), Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) (27.93%), and sleep disorders (24.38%) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Discussion It is important to note that studies included in this review used a range of outcome measures which does not allow for direct comparisons between findings. Most studies reported self-reported measure of symptoms without clinical diagnoses so conclusions can be made for symptom prevalence rather than of mental illness. The importance of managing mental health during pregnancy and after-delivery improves the quality of life and wellbeing of mothers hence developing an evidence-based approached as part of pandemic preparedness would improve mental health during challenging times. Other The work presented in this manuscript was not funded by any specific grants. A study protocol was developed and published in PROSPERO (CRD42021235356) to explore several key objectives.
Period poverty is a global health and social issue that needs to be addressed. The primary aim of this study was to provide a comprehensive understanding on period poverty, including outcomes associated menstruation Methods All observational and randomised clinical trials reporting menstruation challenges, menstrual poverty and menstrual products were included. Our search strategy included multiple electronic databases of PubMed, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, ProQuest and EMBASE.Studies published in a peer review journal in English between the 30th of April 1980 and the 30th of April 2022 were included. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the risk of bias (RoB) of the systematic included studies. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) together with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) are reported overall and for sub-groups. Results A total of 80 studies were systematically selected, where 38 were included in the meta-analysis. Of the 38 studies, 28 focused on children and young girls (i.e., 10-24 years old) and 10 included participants with a wider age range of 15-49 years. The prevalence of using disposable sanitary pads was 45% (95% CI = [0.35,0.58]). The prevalence of menstrual education pre-menarche was 68% (95% CI = [0.56, 0.82]). The prevalence of good MHM was 39% (95% CI = [0.25, 0.61]). Women in rural area (OR = 0.30, 95% CI = [0.13, 0.69]) were 0.70 times less likely to have good MHM practices than those living in urban area. Discussion There was a lack of evidence, especially from low- and middle- income countries. Further research to better understand the scope and prevalence of period poverty should be considered. This will enable the development of improved policies to increase access to menstrual products and medical support where necessary.
IntroductionClinical Trials Units (CTUs) are a key component of delivering non-commercial and commercial clinical research globally. Within the UK, CTUs are seen as a specialist and independent entity available to all researchers requiring support to setup, conduct and deliver clinical trials. Therefore, an involvement of a CTU is highly recommended by national regulators and positively accepted by funders, especially for drug and/or medical device and/or complex intervention trials.AimThis study aims to determine the challenges associated with the management of Covid-19 research managed via the CTU workforce, including the challenges associated with quality assurance, trial setup and data management. Additionally, this study will explore the by-stander effect on trial staff by way of evaluating the mental and physical health impact.Methods/ DesignThis is a mixed methods study. An online novel questionnaire survey study will be conducted among the UK CTU workforce. Quantitative data will be collected using the Qualtrics XM platform. We aim to recruit up to 1,500 CTU staff across the UK workforce. A subgroup sample will be randomly invited to take part in semi-structured interviews. Therefore, this survey will generate both quantitative and qualitative data inclusive of demographic data.ResultsThe findings will inform current initiatives and identify key themes for prioritising in further research to develop robust approaches to support CTU staff, including the development of a start-re-start framework for CTUs for any future pandemics relevant to developing and delivering communicable diseases and non-communicable diseases-based research.Strengths/LimitationsThe validation of the EPIC impact questionnaire used qualitative and quantitative methods which is a strength of the study. However, the study has a single timepoint to obtain data with the secondary outcome measures to be completed at two timepoints as this is an exploratory study attempting to obtain a wider data pool.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.