Dataset Information

Pregnant Women's Perceptions of the Risks and Benefits of Disclosure During Web-Based Mental Health E-Screening Versus Paper-Based Screening: Randomized Controlled Trial.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Pregnant women's perceptions of the risks and benefits during mental health screening impact their willingness to disclose concerns. Early research in violence screening suggests that such perceptions may vary by mode of screening, whereby women view the anonymity of e-screening as less risky than other approaches. Understanding whether mode of screening influences perceptions of risk and benefit of disclosure is important in screening implementation. OBJECTIVE:The objective of this randomized controlled trial was to compare the perceptions of pregnant women randomized to a Web-based screening intervention group and a paper-based screening control group on the level of risk and benefit they perceive in disclosing mental health concerns to their prenatal care provider. A secondary objective was to identify factors associated with women's perceptions of risk and benefit of disclosure. METHODS:Pregnant women recruited from maternity clinics, hospitals, and prenatal classes were computer-randomized to a fully automated Web-based e-screening intervention group or a paper-based control. The intervention group completed the Antenatal Psychosocial Health Assessment and the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale on a computer tablet, whereas the control group completed them on paper. The primary outcome was women's perceptions of the risk and benefits of mental health screening using the Disclosure Expectations Scale (DES). A completer analysis was conducted. Statistical significance was set at P<.05. We used t tests to compare the means of the risk and benefit subscales between groups. RESULTS:Of the 675 eligible women approached, 636 (94.2%) agreed to participate and were randomized to the intervention (n=305) and control (n=331) groups. There were no significant baseline differences between groups. The mode of screening was not associated with either perceived risk or benefit of screening. There were no differences in groups in the mean scores of the risk and benefit of disclosure subscales. Over three-quarters of women in both intervention and control groups perceived that mental health screening was beneficial. However, 43.1% (272/631) of women in both groups reported feeling very, moderately, or somewhat vulnerable during mental health screening. We found that women of low income, those treated previously for depression or anxiety, and those pregnant with their first child were more likely to perceive greater risk. However, these associations were very small. CONCLUSIONS:Pregnant women in both the e-screening and paper-based screening groups perceived benefit and risk of disclosure similarly, suggesting that providers can implement the mode of screening that is most ideal for their clinical setting. Regardless of the mode of screening, a substantial number of women reported feeling vulnerable during mental health screening, highlighting the importance of the need to reduce women's vulnerability throughout the screening process with strategies such as addressing women's concerns, explaining the rationale for screening, and discussing how results will be used. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01899534; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01899534 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6tRKtGC4M).

SUBMITTER: Kingston D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5670313 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Pregnant Women's Perceptions of the Risks and Benefits of Disclosure During Web-Based Mental Health E-Screening Versus Paper-Based Screening: Randomized Controlled Trial.

Kingston Dawn D Biringer Anne A Veldhuyzen van Zanten Sander S Giallo Rebecca R McDonald Sarah S MacQueen Glenda G Vermeyden Lydia L Austin Marie-Paule MP

JMIR mental health 20171020 4

<h4>Background</h4>Pregnant women's perceptions of the risks and benefits during mental health screening impact their willingness to disclose concerns. Early research in violence screening suggests that such perceptions may vary by mode of screening, whereby women view the anonymity of e-screening as less risky than other approaches. Understanding whether mode of screening influences perceptions of risk and benefit of disclosure is important in screening implementation.<h4>Objective</h4>The obje ...[more]

PMID: 29054833

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMajor international guidelines recommend mental health screening during the perinatal period. However, substantial barriers to screening have been reported by pregnant and postpartum women and perinatal care providers. E-screening offers benefits that may address implementation challenges.ObjectiveThe primary objective of this randomized controlled trial was to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of Web-based mental health e-screening compared with paper-based screening among pregnant women. A secondary objective was to identify factors associated with women's preferences for e-screening and disclosure of mental health concerns.MethodsPregnant women recruited from community and hospital-based antenatal clinics and hospital-based prenatal classes were computer-randomized to a fully automated Web-based e-screening intervention group or a paper-based control group. Women were eligible if they spoke or read English, were willing to be randomized to e-screening, and were willing to participate in a follow-up diagnostic interview. The intervention group completed the Antenatal Psychosocial Health Assessment and the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale on a tablet computer, while controls completed them on paper. All women completed self-report baseline questions and were telephoned 1 week after randomization by a blinded research assistant for a MINI International Neuropsychiatric Interview. Renker and Tonkin's tool of feasibility and acceptability of computerized screening was used to assess the feasibility and acceptability of e-screening compared with paper-based screening. Intention-to-treat analysis was used. To identify factors associated with preference for e-screening and disclosure, variables associated with each outcome at P<.20 were simultaneously entered into final multivariable models to estimate adjusted odds ratios (AORs) and 95% CIs.ResultsOf the 675 eligible women approached, 636 agreed to participate (participation rate 94.2%) and were randomized to the intervention (n=305) or control (n=331) groups. There were no significant baseline differences between groups. More women in the e-screening group strongly or somewhat agreed that they would like to use a tablet for answering questions on emotional health (57.9%, 175/302 vs 37.2%, 121/325) and would prefer using a tablet to paper (46.0%, 139/302 vs 29.2%, 95/325), compared with women in the paper-based screening group. There were no differences between groups in women's disclosure of emotional health concerns (94.1%, 284/302 vs 90.2%, 293/325). Women in the e-screening group consistently reported the features of e-screening more favorably than controls (more private or confidential, less impersonal, less time-consuming). In the multivariable models, being in the e-screening group was significantly associated with preferring e-screening (AOR 2.29, 95% CI 1.66-3.17), while no factors were significantly associated with disclosure.ConclusionsThe findings suggest that mental health e-screening is feasible and acceptable to pregnant women.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT01899534; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01899534 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6ntWg1yWb).

Project description:BackgroundPatient narratives are illustrative, individual accounts of patients' experiences with certain health conditions. Web-based patient narratives have become widely available on the internet and in social media, as part of electronically available patient decision aids or Web-based databases. In recent years, the role of patient narratives as a source of information, insight, and support for both health care users and providers has increasingly been emphasized. Although the potential impact of patient stories has high immediate plausibility, it is of interest to know if this impact can be captured in quantitative studies.ObjectiveThis review aimed to evaluate whether research-generated Web-based patient narratives have quantifiable risks or benefits for (potential) patients, relatives, or health care professionals.MethodsWe searched the following databases from August 2017 to March 2019: Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, PsycInfo, Sociological Abstracts, Web of Science, and EMBASE. Titles and abstracts of the retrieved studies were reviewed and assessed for the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Papers were included if they studied the following: (1) (potential) patients, relatives, or health care professionals; (2) the effects of Web-based patient narratives that were generated scientifically (eg, through qualitative research methods); and (3) were quantitative studies. Furthermore, 2 authors independently performed an assessment of the quality of the included studies using a validated checklist.ResultsOf 4226 documents, 17 studies met the inclusion criteria. The studies investigated 10 different sources of Web-based patient narratives. Sample sizes ranged from 23 to 2458. The mean score of the quality assessment was 82.6 (range 61-100). Effects regarding five different purposes were identified as follows: provide information, engage, model behavior, persuade, and comfort. We found positive effects in every category and negative effects in one category (persuade). Several of the reported effects are rather small or were identified under specific experimental conditions.ConclusionsPatient narratives seem to be a promising means to support users in improving their understanding of certain health conditions and possibly to provide emotional support and have an impact on behavioral changes. There is limited evidence for beneficial effects on some outcomes. However, narratives are characterized by considerable heterogeneity and the investigated outcomes are hardly comparable with each other, which makes the overall judgment difficult. As there are numerous possible measures and purposes of narratives, quantifying the impact of Web-based patient narratives remains a challenge. Future research is needed to define the optimal standards for quantitative approaches to narrative-based interventions.

Project description:BackgroundSignposting to web-based interventions is becoming increasingly popular in primary care. Most resources are focused on individuals with clinical problems, but less is known about the uptake of general practice (GP) signposted web-based interventions. GPs in Denmark are responsible for scheduled preventive care during pregnancy and the child's first five years. In the "Family Well-being in General Practice" trial the web-based intervention "Resilientchild.dk" is introduced at these consultations. Resilientchild.dk is designed to improve the capacity of parents to understand the mental state of themselves, their partners, and their children. In this study we assess the uptake and use of this web-based intervention.ObjectiveTo describe participant and practice characteristics associated with the use of a web-based psychoeducational intervention. Eligible participants were pregnant women presenting at their first antenatal assessment, usually around 6-10 gestational weeks.MethodsThe study was nested in a cluster randomised trial of resilientchild.dk. We conducted a relative importance analysis, which allows for determination of the variables most strongly associated with website use. To assess the direction and magnitude of the influences of the identified variables, we applied multinomial generalized linear mixed modelling. A practice random effect allows us to account for clustering of women within practices.ResultsParity and the absence of a nurse or midwife in the practice were important factors driving a decrease in the likelihood of using resilientchild.dk. Being a student or living outside the capital city were important factors driving an increase in the likelihood of using resilientchild.dk.ConclusionThe data offer unique opportunities to assess the utilisation of a web-based mental health-promotion intervention following advice from a clinician. This study draws conclusions about which patients are likely to access similar resources and which practice characteristics encourage their use.Trial registrationRegistered in clinicaltrials.gov, Trial number: NCT04129359 Date of registration: 16/10/2019 ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04129359 ).

Project description:BackgroundThe EVERREST Prospective Study is a multicentre observational cohort study of pregnancies affected by severe early-onset fetal growth restriction. The study recruits women with singleton pregnancies where the estimated fetal weight is less than the 3rd centile and below 600 g, between 20 + 0 and 26 + 6 weeks of pregnancy, in the absence of a known chromosomal, structural or infective cause.MethodThe reported study was retrospective descriptive qualitative interview study of women who had participated in the EVERREST Prospective Study. The aim of this study was to explore the experiences and perceptions of pregnant women taking part in research during a pregnancy affected by severe early-onset fetal growth restriction. Audio-recorded semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of 12 women, at least 1 year after delivery of their baby. Two of these pregnancies had ended in stillbirth and one in neonatal death, reflecting the outcomes seen in the EVERREST Prospective Study. Participants gave informed consent, were 16 years or older and were interviewed in English. A topic guide was used to ensure a consistent approach. Questions focused on pregnancy experiences, involvement with the EVERREST study and potential involvement in future research. Recordings were transcribed verbatim for thematic analysis using NVivo10.ResultsFour broad themes were identified; 'before joining the EVERREST Prospective Study', 'participating in research', 'information and support' and 'looking back and looking forwards'. Each broad theme incorporated several subthemes. All participants recalled their reaction to being told their baby was smaller than expected. The way this news was given had a lasting impact. A range of benefits of participation in the EVERREST Prospective Study were described and the participants were positive about the way it was conducted. As a consequence, they were receptive to participating in future research. However, the findings suggest that research teams should be sensitive when approaching families at a difficult time or when they are already participating in other research.ConclusionsThis study highlights the willingness of pregnant women to participate in research and identifies strategies for researchers to engage participants.

Dataset Information

Pregnant Women's Perceptions of the Risks and Benefits of Disclosure During Web-Based Mental Health E-Screening Versus Paper-Based Screening: Randomized Controlled Trial.

Publications

Pregnant Women's Perceptions of the Risks and Benefits of Disclosure During Web-Based Mental Health E-Screening Versus Paper-Based Screening: Randomized Controlled Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets