Open Access
Open Peer Review

This article has Open Peer Review reports available.

How does Open Peer Review work?

The association of unwanted pregnancy and social support with depressive symptoms in pregnancy: evidence from rural Southwestern Ethiopia

  • Yohannes Dibaba1Email author,
  • Mesganaw Fantahun2 and
  • Michelle J Hindin3
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth201313:135

DOI: 10.1186/1471-2393-13-135

Received: 18 December 2012

Accepted: 19 June 2013

Published: 24 June 2013

Abstract

Background

Depression in pregnancy has adverse health outcomes for mothers and children. The magnitude and risk factors of maternal depression during pregnancy is less known in developing countries. This study examines the association between pregnancy intention, social support and depressive symptoms in pregnancy in Ethiopia.

Methods

Data for this study comes from a baseline survey conducted as part of a community- based cohort study that involved 627 pregnant women from a Demographic Surveillance Site (DSS) in Southwestern Ethiopia. The Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) was used to measure depressive symptoms during pregnancy. Data on depressive symptoms, pregnancy intention, social support and other explanatory variables were gathered using an interviewer-administered structured questionnaire. The association between independent variables and depressive symptom during pregnancy was assessed using multivariable logistic regression.

Results

The prevalence of depressive symptoms during pregnancy was 19.9% (95% CI, 16.8-23.1), using EPDS cut off point of 13 and above. The mean score on the EPDS was 8, ranging from 0 to 25 (SD ±5.4). Women reporting that the pregnancy was unwanted were almost twice as likely to experience depressive symptoms compared with women with a wanted pregnancy. (Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR) = 1.96, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.04-3.69) Women who reported moderate (AOR = 0.27; 95% CI 0.14-0.53) and high (AOR = 0.23, 95% CI 0.11-0.47) social support during pregnancy were significantly less likely to report depressive symptoms. Women who experienced household food insecurity and intimate partner physical violence during pregnancy were also more likely to report depressive symptoms.

Conclusion

About one in five pregnant women in the study area reported symptoms of depression. While unwanted pregnancy increases women’s risk of depression, increased social support plays a buffering role from depression. Thus, identifying women’s pregnancy intention and the extent of social support they receive during antenatal care visits is needed to provide appropriate counseling and improve women’s mental health during pregnancy.

Keywords

Depressive symptoms Social support Pregnancy Violence Food insecurity Ethiopia

Background

Mental health problems, such as depression, rank among the top causes of disability among women worldwide; however, they still remain inconspicuous as a component of reproductive health care [1]. Several studies have shown that depression, anxiety, and stress in pregnancy are risk factors for adverse outcomes for women and children. Depression places pregnant women at greater risk for inadequate prenatal care, increased alcohol use and poorer weight gain in pregnancy [13]. The adverse intergenerational effects of maternal depression on children’s health, development, and behavior are also well documented [35]. For instance, a meta-analysis involving studies from both developed and developing countries showed that antenatal depression is associated with preterm birth, intrauterine growth restriction, and low birth weight [6]. A study from Ethiopia found that antenatal common mental disorders such as depression, anxiety and somatic symptoms are associated with prolonged labor, delayed initiation of breast feeding and more diarrheal episodes for infants [7]. Moreover, antenatal depression is a predictor of postnatal depression--women who are depressed during pregnancy have a higher risk of developing depression during the postpartum period [8, 9].

We focus on depressive symptomatology in pregnancy due to its adverse consequences for mothers and children. Unlike postnatal depression, which is increasingly recognized as an important public health issue in low-income countries, antenatal depression and its effects on maternal and child health is relatively less studied. Estimates of the prevalence of antenatal depression vary substantially. A recent systematic review of studies from developed countries found that antenatal depression affects 13% of pregnant women in the second and 12% of women in third trimester [10]. Studies from South Asia and Latin America have reported rates of 20% and higher [1114]. Evidence from developing countries suggests that depression during pregnancy is common-- in Sub-Saharan Africa prevalence ranged from 8.3% to 39% [1518]. In Ethiopia, its magnitude and risk factors are not well known.

For most women, pregnancy is a time of positive expectation, but may also be a time for psychological and physiological challenges. It is accompanied by hormonal changes and can represent a time of increased vulnerability for the onset or return of depression [19]. However, the high prevalence of maternal depression in poor countries may be related to women’s exposure to several depression-related risk factors, including poverty [12, 17, 20], low social support [2124], domestic violence [2527], HIV/AIDS [28, 29] and reproductive health outcomes and behaviors such as high parity, unwanted pregnancy, unsafe abortion, infertility, and pregnancy complications [3033].

The intersection of unintended pregnancy and maternal mental health is not well studied in developing countries. The few studies that considered the influences of unintended pregnancy have shown that women with an unintended pregnancy are at an increased risk of depression during pregnancy than women with intended pregnancies [3237]. Unintended pregnancy may increase a woman’s exposure to psychosocial stressors, decrease social support provided to her by the partner, increase her level of depressive symptoms, and decrease her overall life satisfaction [3436]. Some studies show no association between unintended pregnancy and depressive symptoms during pregnancy [11, 38].

Social support has the potential to play a protective role by buffering the impacts of life stress on emotional wellbeing of the woman during pregnancy [24, 39, 40]. Studies have shown that social support plays a buffering role from stressful life events by providing resources, support and strength during pregnancy. Understanding women’s pregnancy intention and the extent of social support they receive may help to improve healthy behaviors during pregnancy and consequently better maternal and neonatal health outcomes. This study attempts to examine the associations between pregnancy intention, social support and depressive symptoms among pregnant women in Ethiopia, where there are high levels of unintended pregnancy (estimated at 32% in 2011a) and women have low partner support during pregnancy [41].

Methods

Study setting and sample

The study took place in a Demographic Surveillance Site (DSS) in Gilgel Gibe Dam area in Southwestern Ethiopia. The Gilgel Gibe DSS is located at about 260 km southwest of Addis Ababa (the capital), and is used to collect vital events data through an update of multiple times in a year. The DSS area has a population of over 55,000, a crude birth rate of 35 per 1000, and a population growth rate of about 2.7% per annum by 2012b. Data collection at the site is done by Jimma University.

Data for the present study comes from a baseline survey conducted as part of a population-based cohort study in which pregnant women were identified and followed to examine factors that influence birth outcome. The outcome variable for the present analysis is maternal depression during pregnancy. All pregnant women in their 2nd and 3rd trimester living in the eleven kebelesc (Villages) in Gilgel Gibe DSS area were targeted for participation. Six hundred twenty seven pregnant women were identified from the DSS registration and from the records of Health Extension Workers who work in each village. A baseline survey was conducted from June to July 2012 on 627 pregnant women.

A structured questionnaire was developed and administered to all study participants (study tool attached as Additional file 1). The questionnaire was first developed in English and then translated and back translated to Oromo – a local language spoken in the study area. Ten trained female interviewers with a minimum of diploma-level education collected the data. They had five days of training on how to administer the questionnaire, practice interviewing and role-plays, and how to deal with ethical issues. After the training, interviewers undertook a pilot study, and information from the pilot study was used to finalize the questionnaire. Data on depressive symptoms, pregnancy intention, social support and other explanatory variables were gathered using an interviewer-administered structured questionnaire. All study participants were interviewed at their home in private area. Ethical approval was obtained from the College of Health Sciences, Addis Ababa University. Moreover, support letters were obtained from regional, zonal and district health offices and kebele (village) administrations were informed about the study. Participants were asked for informed consent, and participation in the study was fully voluntary.

Measurements

Depressive symptoms were measured using the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS), which describes depression as cognitive and affective features that last for at least one week, including the inability to laugh, the inability to look forward to things with enjoyment, blaming oneself unnecessarily, anxiety or worry, being scared or panicky, the inability to cope, difficulty sleeping, feeling sad or miserable, crying, and thoughts of harming oneself [42]. The EPDS is widely used and has been validated for use during pregnancy in different countries and settings [4347], including urban and rural Ethiopia [45, 48]. A psychiatrist checked the translation and back translation of the depression questions. Moreover, considering the difficulty in understanding items 1 to 3 of the depression scale (EPDS), we used examples suggested and applied by Hanlon and colleagues in their validation study in Butajira (Central Ethiopia) [45]. The items were scored on a scale of 0–3, allowing a total score ranging from 0 to 30. The internal consistency of the EPDS was tested using Cronbach alpha and was found to be 0.85. Like other previous studies that used EPDS cut of point of 13 and above [14, 17], we used a cut of point of 13 and above on the scale to identify women with depressive symptoms. No other measures of mental health problems, such as anxiety and stress, were collected in this study.

The key independent variable was pregnancy intention. Women were asked to recall their feelings at the time they became pregnant: “At the time you became pregnant, did you want to become pregnant then, did you want to wait until later, or did you not want to have any (more) children at all?” The responses were categorized as (1) wanted then “wanted” (2) wanted to happen later “mistimed” and (3) did not want at all “unwanted”.

Social support was measured using the Maternity Social Support Scale (MSSS) developed by Webster and colleagues [49]. The scale contains six items and includes questions on family support, friendship network, help from spouse, conflict with spouse, feeling controlled by spouse, and feeling unloved by spouse. Each item was measured on a five-point Likert scale and a total score of 30 was possible. We classified social support in to three categories; high social support (for scores 24–30), medium social support (18–23) and low social support (below 18) categories. The internal consistency of the scale was tested using Cronbach’s alpha and was found to be 0.74.

We also considered several other explanatory variables based on previous studies including age (coded as 15–24, 25–34 and 35–49 years), women’s education (none, primary and secondary and above), occupation (housewife, farmer and employed in other services), wealth index, parity, history of miscarriage or stillbirth, perceived work burden during pregnancy, intimate partner violence, and household food security. The wealth index was computed from ownership of the following household assets: radio, television, electricity, toilet, farm land, and animals such as cattle, sheep, and goats. Principal Component Analysis (PCA) was conducted and the resulting index was divided into three categories representing poor, middle and wealthy.

Women were asked whether they have experienced a miscarriage or stillbirth in their lifetime to measure any experience of pregnancy loss. All women participating in the study were asked about the type of physical work they did in the seven days before the survey, and whether they perceived that the work was ‘difficult’, ‘moderate’ or ‘easy’ for them. Intimate partner violence was measured by asking women whether they have ever been beaten during the current pregnancy by their husbands or partners.

Household food insecurity was measured with a six- item scale based on previously validated measures in developing countries. Women were asked whether because food ran out or money was not enough to buy food, in the last 3 months, they: (1) worried about running out of food, (2) ran out of food, (3) reduced the variety of food for their children, (4) did not have enough food to give their children to eat, (5) spent the whole day without food, and (6) or anyone else in the household had ever had to ask others for food or money to buy food. For each item, ‘yes’ was coded with “1” and no coded as “0” and a summative index of food insecurity was created. Households were classified as ‘food-insecure’ if the respondent answered affirmatively to two or more of the six household food security questions. The scale had an internal consistency (Cronback’s alpha) of 0.85.

Data analysis

Data were analyzed using STATA Version 11. First, frequency distributions of the characteristics of study population were tabulated. Next, bivariate analysis was done to compare depressive symptoms by study characteristics using Chi-square tests. Variables were entered into multivariate models based on their association in the bivariate analysis (at P < 0.20) including almost all variables that were expected to be associated from the literature review. Multivariable logistic regression was done to identify factors that are independently and significantly associated with depression during pregnancy. Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals are reported.

Results

Of the 627 women targeted for inclusion in the study, 622 were successfully interviewed (99% response rate). The mean age of study participants was 26 years, and ranged from 14 to 40 years (SD ±5.02). Nearly all (99%) of the respondents were married, 72% had no formal education, 77% were housewives, and 76% lived in rural areas. The median gestational age of the participants was 7 months. The average number of children ever born was 3.9, and nearly one-third (32.6%) had given birth to 5 or more children. With regards to pregnancy intention, 59% of women reported that their current pregnancy was wanted, while 28% and 13% of women their current pregnancy was mistimed and unwanted respectively. Forty-one percent of women reported food insecurity during pregnancy (Table 1).
Table 1

Description of study participants, Southwestern Ethiopia, 2012

Variables

Number

Percent

Age

  

  15-24

207

33.3

  25-34

360

57.9

  35+

55

8.8

Educational status

  

  No formal education

447

71.9

  Primary

146

23.5

Secondary & above

29

4.7

Residence

  

  Rural

475

76.4

  Urban

147

23.6

Marital status

  

  Currently married

618

99.4

  Widowed or divorced

4

0.6

Occupation

  

  House wife

484

77.8

  Farmer

92

14.8

  Employed/family business

46

7.4

Trimester of pregnancy

  

  Second

231

37.1

  Third

391

62.9

Household food security status

  

  Food Secure

365

58. 7

  Food insecure

257

41.3

Pregnancy Intention

  

  Wanted

367

59.0

  Mistimed

175

28.1

  Unwanted

80

12.9

Parity

  

  0

84

13.5

  1-2

163

26.2

  3-4

172

27.6

  5+

203

32.7

Total

622

100

The overall prevalence of depressive symptoms among the pregnant women was 19.9% (95% CI, 16.8-23.1). The mean score on the EPDS was 8, and ranged from 0 to 25 (SD ±5.4). Bivariate analysis showed that the prevalence of depression during pregnancy did not vary by age, wealth index, parity and trimester of pregnancy. However, the prevalence of prenatal depression varied by education, occupation, pregnancy intention, social support, perceived work burden, intimate partner physical violence, food security status and previous experience of miscarriage or stillbirth. Considering educational status, a relatively higher proportion of women with secondary and above level of education (24%) reported depression than women with no education (22%) or with primary education (11.6%). The prevalence of depressed mood in pregnancy also varied by pregnancy intention--35% of women with an unwanted pregnancy reported depressive symptoms as compared to 16% of women with wanted pregnancy. Moreover, women who scored 13 and above on the EPDS scale were more likely to have low social support, high work burden, and be farmers by occupation. Women with a high score on the EDPS were also more likely to have experienced intimate partner violence, food insecurity, and have previous history of miscarriage or stillbirth. Social support was inversely related to depressive symptoms with women reporting high social support being less likely to have depressive symptoms (Table 2).
Table 2

Prevalence of maternal depressive symptoms by women’s pregnancy intentions, social support and other characteristics, Southwestern Ethiopia, 2012

Variables

Depressive symptoms (EPDS ≥13)

% with depressive symptoms

P

No

Yes

Pregnancy Intention

    

  Wanted

307

60

16.4

0.001

  Mistimed

139

36

20.6

  Unwanted

52

28

35.0

Social support

    

  Low

30

36

53.0

0.001

  Medium

253

53

22.6

  High

215

35

16.8

Age

    

  15-24

171

36

17.4

0.53

  25-34

284

76

21.1

  35+

43

12

21.8

Educational status

    

  No formal education

347

100

34.7

0.02

  Primary

129

17

11.6

  Secondary & above

22

7

24.1

Occupation

    

  Housewife

411

71

14.7

0.001

  Farmer

51

40

44.0

  Employed/family business

36

13

26.5

Wealth tertile

    

  Poor

165

43

20.7

0.17

  Middle

159

48

23.2

  Rich

174

33

15.9

Parity

    

  0

70

15

17.9

0.69

  1-2

134

29

17.8

  3-4

140

31

18.0

  5+

154

49

24.1

Trimester of pregnancy

    

  2nd

186

45

19.5

0.83

  3rd

312

79

20.2

History of miscarriage/stillbirth

    

  No

462

103

18.2

0.001

  Yes

36

21

36.8

Presence of domestic violence

    

  No

484

112

18.8

0.001

  Yes

14

12

46.2

Household food security

    

  Food Secure

336

29

8.0

0.001

  Food insecure

162

95

37.0

Perceived work burden

    

  Difficult

109

43

28.3

0.01

  Moderate

185

41

18.1

  Easy

204

40

16.4

  Total

498

124

19.9

 
Women who did not want the current pregnancy were nearly twice as likely as women who wanted the pregnancy to experience depression during pregnancy (Odds Ratio (OR) = 1.96, 95% CI: 1.04-3.69). Women who reported a mistimed pregnancy did not differ significantly from those who wanted the pregnancy in prenatal depression. The level of social support was strongly associated with depression during pregnancy. Women with high social support were significantly less likely to experience depression during pregnancy compared with women who had high levels of social support (OR: 0.23, 95% CI 0.11-0.47). Those with moderate score on the social support scale were also less likely (OR: 0.27, 95% CI 0.14-0.53) to experience depression during pregnancy. With regards to occupation, women engaged in farming (OR: 3.43, 95% CI 1.95-6.05), and those engaged in the service sector such as family business or government employee (OR: 2.50, 95% CI 1.13-5.56) were more likely to report depressive symptoms in pregnancy than house wives. Moreover, women with household food insecurity are nearly five times as likely to be depressed during pregnancy as compared to women from food secure households (OR: 4.60, 95% CI 2.75-7.70). Presence of intimate partner violence during pregnancy was also associated with an increased likelihood that a woman was depressed during pregnancy, although the association was marginally significant (Table 3).
Table 3

Unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios of women’s experience of maternal depressive symptoms by pregnancy intention, social support and other characteristics, Southwestern Ethiopia, 2012

Variables

   Depressed mood, OR (95% CI)

 

Unadjusted OR

Adjusted1OR

(95% CI)

(95% CI)

Pregnancy intention

  

  Wanted (reference)

1.00

1.00

  Mistimed

1.33(0.84-2.10)

0.97(0.56-1.66)

  Unwanted

2.76(1.61-4.70)***

1.96(1.04 -3.69)*

Social support

  

  Low (reference)

1.00

1.00

  Medium

0.17(0.10-.31)***

0.27 (0.14-0.53)***

  High

0.14(0.07-.25)***

0.23(0.11-0.47)***

Educational status

  

  No education (reference)

1.00

1.00

  Primary

0.46(0.26-.79)*

0.56(0.30-1.05)

  Secondary & above

1.10(0.46-2.66)

1.83(0.64-5.27)

Wealth tertile

  

  Lower (reference)

1.00

1.00

  Middle

1.16 (0.73-1.85)

1.43 (0.82-2.51)

  Upper

0.73(0.44-1.20)

0.88(0.48-1.62)

Occupation

  

  Housewife (reference)

1.00

1.00

  Farmer

4.54(2.80-7.37)**

3.43(1.95-6.05)**

  Employed/family business

2.09(1.06-4.14)*

2.50(1.13-5.56)*

Perceived work burden in pregnancy

  

  Too difficult (reference)

1.00

1.00

  Moderate

0.56(0.34-.92)*

0.72(0.41-1.26)

  Easy

0.49(0.30-.81)**

0.68(0.38-1.19)

Food insecurity

6.79(4.31-10.72)***

4.60(2.75-7.70)***

History of miscarriage or stillbirth

2.62 (1.47-4.67)**

1.27(0.62-2.57)

Partner violence during pregnancy

3.75(1.42-8.92)**

3.41(1.18-9.10)**

1Adjusted for education, wealth tertile, occupation, perceived work burden, food security status, history of miscarriage or still birth and partner physical violence during pregnancy.

*p < 0.05 **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.

Discussion

The magnitude of antenatal depression in the current study population, 19.9% (95% CI, 16.8-23.1), though within the range of findings reported from Sub-Saharan Africa and other developing countries [1117], is high when compared to findings from a systematic review that showed prevalence of prenatal depression of 12.0% in developed countries [10]. In Sub-Saharan Africa, the prevalence of antenatal depression ranged from 8.3% to 39% [1618]. A very high level of depression was reported in a recent study in Cape Town, South Africa, where depressed mood in pregnancy was 39%. There has been no study of antenatal depression in Ethiopia, but in one study that used the Hopkins symptoms checklist (HSCL) to measure the prevalence of postnatal maternal and paternal symptoms of anxiety and depression, the prevalence of depression (defined as mean score for each HSCL item of ≥1.75) among adult women was 37% [20].

In this study, factors that were significantly associated with depressed mood in pregnancy include pregnancy intention, social support, occupation, food security status and partner violence during pregnancy. With regards to pregnancy intention, having unwanted pregnancy, not mistimed pregnancy, is associated with antenatal depression. Women reporting unwanted pregnancy are nearly 2 times more likely to be depressed as compared to women with planned pregnancies. Several previous studies have shown such an association between unwanted pregnancy and depression during pregnancy [32, 34, 35]. However, women reporting mistimed pregnancies did not differ significantly from women with wanted pregnancy in terms of depressive symptoms during pregnancy.

The strongest association in this study was with social support. In this study, women with high social support were 0.26 times as likely as women with low social support to experience antenatal depression. Similarly, women with moderate social support were 0.27 times as likely as women with low social support to experience antenatal depression. The association between social support and depression during pregnancy has been confirmed by studies from both developing and developed countries. These studies have shown that social support plays a buffering role from stressful life events by providing resources, support and strength during pregnancy [21, 39]. Much related to the absence of social support is the presence of intimate partner violence during pregnancy. In this study, although very few women (about 4%) reported ever been beaten during the current pregnancy, there was a significant association between intimate partner violence and depression during pregnancy, as has been found in several previous studies [26, 27].

Household level food insecurity is another important associated factor with depressed mood in pregnancy. About 41% of women in this study reported food insecurity, which can be one main cause of stress in life. Consequently, women reporting food insecurity are nearly five times as likely as food secure women to report depressive symptoms during pregnancy. Food insecurity is a major problem in Ethiopia and the study area in particular [20]. Moreover, this study took place in the summer months of June and July and in rural Ethiopia, these are times when most households run out of food, and food insecurity tends to be high during this season. Studies have also indicated that the effects of food insecurity extend beyond the nutritional effects and include anxiety and depression [20].

Our result indicates that socio-demographic factors such as age, parity, place of residence and wealth were not associated with prenatal depression. Similarly, the association between education and depressive symptoms was attenuated once the effects of other socio-demographic and obstetric factors were controlled for. Although such factors were found to be associated in some previous studies [17, 25], a systematic review proved that such factors (age, parity, socio-economic status, and education) were not significant in multivariate models in majority of the studies included in the review [34].

Limitations of the study

Despite the contributions that it makes to the literature on antenatal depression, this study has some limitations. First, although it examines the influences of unwanted pregnancy and social support on depressive symptoms during pregnancy, the study has not considered the presence of other important mental health conditions such as anxiety and stress in pregnancy. Second, given the nature of the study, a cross-sectional study, it is not possible to establish causal relationships. There is also a possibility of recall bias when reporting pregnancy intention. Moreover, standard instrument was not used to measure the variable ‘partner physical violence’ during pregnancy.

Conclusion

Overall, our study found a high level of depressive symptoms among pregnant women in the study area. Although the study lacks clinical validation, the EPDS has been validated in several settings among pregnant women and is found to be a valid screening instrument for depressive symptoms during pregnancy. As shown above, much of these stressful life experiences may stem from the socio-economic context in which women live such as food insecurity, intimate partner violence and unwanted pregnancy. Understanding the factors that buffer the effects of stressful life events on depression in pregnancy is important. This study demonstrated that social support during pregnancy plays such a buffering role against depression. It is therefore important to screen for depression during pregnancy and provide appropriate counseling during routine prenatal care visits. The WHO has made such recommendations, integration of mental health into primary health care settings in developing countries [50]). In conclusion, enabling women to meet their reproductive goals and interventions that encourage social support in pregnancy help a lot in reducing mental health problems such as depression.

Endnotes

a Analysis of 2011 EDHS data for pregnant women showed that 32% of pregnancies were not intended. But, for births in the five years before the survey, 25% of them were reported as unintended.

b Data from DSS registration for the year 2012.

c Kebele is the smallest administrative unit in Ethiopia.

Abbreviations

CSA: 

Central Statistical Authority

DSS: 

Demographic Surveillance Site

EPDS: 

Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale

OR: 

Odds Ratio

WHO: 

World Health Organization.

Declarations

Acknowledgments

We are very grateful to the study participants for providing information, and the data collectors and supervisors for collecting the data. The study was funded by the African Doctoral Dissertation Research Fellowship Program (ADDRF) and Addis Ababa University through thematic research project.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Population & Family Health, College of Public Health and Medical Sciences, Jimma University
(2)
School of Public Health, College of Health Sciences, Addis Ababa University
(3)
Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University

References

  1. WHO: Mental health aspects of women’s reproductive health; A global review of the litreature. 2009, http://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/publications/general/9789241563567/en/index.html, accessed on 16/08/2012Google Scholar
  2. Wachs TD, Black M, Engle P: Maternal depression: a global threat to children’s health, development, and behavior and to human rights. Child Development Perspectives. 2009, 3: 51-59. 10.1111/j.1750-8606.2008.00077.x.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  3. Dunkel Schetter C, Tanner L: Anxiety, depression and stress in pregnancy: implications for mothers, children, research, and practice. Curr Opin Psychiatry. 2012, 25 (2): 141-148. 10.1097/YCO.0b013e3283503680.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  4. Kinsella MT, Monk C: Impact of maternal stress, depression and anxiety on fetal neurobehavioral development. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2009, 52 (3): 425-440. 10.1097/GRF.0b013e3181b52df1.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  5. Cox AD: Maternal depression and impact on children’s development. Arch Dis Child. 1988, 63 (1): 90-95. 10.1136/adc.63.1.90.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  6. Grote NK, Bridge JA, Gavin AR, Melville JL, Iyengar S, Katon WJ: A meta-analysis of depression during pregnancy and the risk of preterm birth, low birth weight, and intrauterine growth restriction. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2010, 67 (10): 1012-1024. 10.1001/archgenpsychiatry.2010.111.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  7. Hanlon C, Medhin G, Alem A, Tesfaye F, Lakew Z, Worku B, et al: Impact of antenatal common mental disorders upon perinatal outcomes in Ethiopia: the P-MaMiE population-based cohort study. Trop Med Int Health. 2009, 14 (2): 156-166. 10.1111/j.1365-3156.2008.02198.x.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Wissart J, Parshad O, Kulkarni S: Prevalence of pre- and postpartum depression in Jamaican women. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2005, 5: 15-10.1186/1471-2393-5-15.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  9. Heron J, O’Connor TG, Evans J, Golding J, Glover V: The course of anxiety and depression through pregnancy and the postpartum in a community sample. J Affect Disord. 2004, 80 (1): 65-73. 10.1016/j.jad.2003.08.004.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Bennett HA, Einarson A, Taddio A, Koren G, Einarson TR: Prevalence of depression during pregnancy: systematic review. Obstet Gynecol. 2004, 103 (4): 698-709. 10.1097/01.AOG.0000116689.75396.5f.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Faisal-Cury A, Menezes P, Araya R, Zugaib M: Common mental disorders during pregnancy: prevalence and associated factors among low-income women in Sao Paulo, Brazil: depression and anxiety during pregnancy. Arch Womens Ment Health. 2009, 12 (5): 335-343. 10.1007/s00737-009-0081-6.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Husain N, Cruickshank K, Husain M, Khan S, Tomenson B, Rahman A: Social stress and depression during pregnancy and in the postnatal period in British Pakistani mothers: a cohort study. J Affect Disord. 2012, 140 (3): 268-276. 10.1016/j.jad.2012.02.009.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  13. Husain N, Parveen A, Husain M, Saeed Q, Jafri F, Rahman R, et al: Prevalence and psychosocial correlates of perinatal depression: a cohort study from urban Pakistan. Arch Womens Ment Health. 2011, 14 (5): 395-403. 10.1007/s00737-011-0233-3.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Golbasi Z, Kelleci M, Kisacik G, Cetin A: Prevalence and correlates of depression in pregnancy among Turkish women. Matern Child Health J. 2010, 14 (4): 485-491. 10.1007/s10995-009-0459-0.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Cox JL: Psychiatric morbidity and pregnancy: a controlled study of 263 semi-rural Ugandan women. Br J Psychiatry. 1979, 134: 401-405. 10.1192/bjp.134.4.401.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Abiodun OA, Adetoro OO, Ogunbode OO: Psychiatric morbidity in a pregnant population in Nigeria. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 1993, 15 (2): 125-128. 10.1016/0163-8343(93)90109-2.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Hartley M, Tomlinson M, Greco E, Comulada WS, Stewart J, le Roux I, et al: Depressed mood in pregnancy: prevalence and correlates in two Cape Town peri-urban settlements. Reprod Health. 2011, 8: 9-10.1186/1742-4755-8-9.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  18. Adewuya AO, Ola BA, Aloba OO, Dada AO, Fasoto OO: Prevalence and correlates of depression in late pregnancy among Nigerian women. Depress Anxiety. 2007, 24 (1): 15-21. 10.1002/da.20221.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Smith MV, Shao L, Howell H, Lin H, Yonkers KA: Perinatal depression and birth outcomes in a Healthy Start project. Matern Child Health J. 2011, 15 (3): 401-409. 10.1007/s10995-010-0595-6.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  20. Hadley C, Tegegn A, Tessema F, Cowan JA, Asefa M, Galea S: Food insecurity, stressful life events and symptoms of anxiety and depression in east Africa: evidence from the Gilgel Gibe growth and development study. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2008, 62 (11): 980-986. 10.1136/jech.2007.068460.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Collins NL, Dunkel-Schetter C, Lobel M, Scrimshaw SC: Social support in pregnancy: psychosocial correlates of birth outcomes and postpartum depression. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1993, 65 (6): 1243-1258.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Divney AA, Sipsma H, Gordon D, Niccolai L, Magriples U, Kershaw T: Depression during pregnancy among young couples: the effect of personal and partner experiences of stressors and the buffering effects of social relationships. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2012, 25 (3): 201-207. 10.1016/j.jpag.2012.02.003.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  23. Spoozak L, Gotman N, Smith MV, Belanger K, Yonkers KA: Evaluation of a social support measure that may indicate risk of depression during pregnancy. J Affect Disord. 2009, 114 (1–3): 216-223.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Norbeck JS, Anderson NJ: Life stress, social support, and anxiety in mid- and late-pregnancy among low income women. Res Nurs Health. 1989, 12 (5): 281-287. 10.1002/nur.4770120503.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Ali FA, Israr SM, Ali BS, Janjua NZ: Association of various reproductive rights, domestic violence and marital rape with depression among Pakistani women. BMC Psychiatry. 2009, 9: 77-10.1186/1471-244X-9-77.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  26. Zhang Y, Zou S, Cao Y: Relationship between domestic violence and postnatal depression among pregnant Chinese women. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2012, 116 (1): 26-30. 10.1016/j.ijgo.2011.08.011.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Ludermir AB, Lewis G, Valongueiro SA, de Araujo TV, Araya R: Violence against women by their intimate partner during pregnancy and postnatal depression: a prospective cohort study. Lancet. 2010, 376 (9744): 903-910. 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60887-2.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Stein A, Krebs G, Richter L, Tomkins A, Rochat T, Bennish ML: Babies of a pandemic. Arch Dis Child. 2005, 90 (2): 116-118. 10.1136/adc.2004.049361.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  29. Dhanda A, Narayan T: Mental health and human rights. Lancet. 2007, 370 (9594): 1197-1198. 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61247-1.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Rees DI, Sabia JJ: The relationship between abortion and depression: new evidence from the fragile families and child wellbeing study. Med Sci Monit. 2007, 13 (10): CR430-CR436.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Pedersen W: Abortion and depression: a population-based longitudinal study of young women. Scand J Public Health. 2008, 36 (4): 424-428. 10.1177/1403494807088449.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Christensen AL, Stuart EA, Perry DF, Le HN: Unintended pregnancy and perinatal depression trajectories in low-income, high-risk Hispanic immigrants. Prevention science. 2011, 12 (3): 289-299. 10.1007/s11121-011-0213-x.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  33. Berenson AB, Breitkopf CR, Wu ZH: Reproductive correlates of depressive symptoms among low- income minority women. Obstet Gynecol. 2003, 102 (6): 1310-1317. 10.1016/j.obstetgynecol.2003.08.012.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Lancaster CA, Gold KJ, Flynn HA, Yoo H, Marcus SM, Davis MM: Risk factors for depressive symptoms during pregnancy: a systematic review. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010, 202 (1): 5-14. 10.1016/j.ajog.2009.09.007.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  35. Orr ST, Miller CA: Unintended pregnancy and the psychosocial well-being of pregnant women. Womens Health Issues. 1997, 7 (1): 38-46. 10.1016/S1049-3867(96)00017-5.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Gipson JD, Koenig MA, Hindin MJ: The effects of unintended pregnancy on infant, child, and parental health: a review of the literature. Stud Fam Plann. 2008, 39 (1): 18-38. 10.1111/j.1728-4465.2008.00148.x.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Hardee K, Eggleston E, Wong EL, Irwanto , Hull TH: Unintended pregnancy and women’s psychological well-being in Indonesia. J Biosoc Sci. 2004, 36 (5): 617-626. 10.1017/S0021932003006321.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Phipps MG, Nunes AP: Assessing pregnancy intention and associated risks in pregnant adolescents. Matern Child Health J. 2012, 16 (9): 1820-1827. 10.1007/s10995-011-0928-0.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Elsenbruch S, Benson S, Rucke M, Rose M, Dudenhausen J, Pincus-Knackstedt MK, et al: Social support during pregnancy: effects on maternal depressive symptoms, smoking and pregnancy outcome. Hum Reprod. 2007, 22 (3): 869-877.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Mercer RT, Ferketich SL: Stress and social support as predictors of anxiety and depression during pregnancy. ANS Adv Nurs Sci. 1988, 10 (2): 26-39.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Geleto A, Aseffa F, Dessie Y: Do male involve in Antenatal care? The views of women attending ANC in Harari Public Health Institutions, Eastern Ethiopia. Harar Bulletin of Health Sciences. 2012, 6: 76-92.Google Scholar
  42. Cox JL, Holden JM, Sagovsky R: Detection of postnatal depression. Development of the 10-item Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale. Br J Psychiatry. 1987, 150: 782-786. 10.1192/bjp.150.6.782.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Lau Y, Wang Y, Yin L, Chan KS, Guo X: Validation of the Mainland Chinese version of the Edinburgh postnatal depression scale in Chengdu mothers. Int J Nurs Stud. 2010, 47 (9): 1139-1151. 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2010.02.005.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Rubertsson C, Borjesson K, Berglund A, Josefsson A, Sydsjo G: The Swedish validation of Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS). Nord J Psychiatry. 2011, 65 (6): 414-418. 10.3109/08039488.2011.590606.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Hanlon C, Medhin G, Alem A, Araya M, Abdulahi A, Hughes M, et al: Detecting perinatal common mental disorders in Ethiopia: validation of the self-reporting questionnaire and Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale. J Affect Disord. 2008, 108 (3): 251-262. 10.1016/j.jad.2007.10.023.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Bergink V, Kooistra L, Lambregtse-van den Berg MP, Wijnen H, Bunevicius R, van Baar A, et al: Validation of the Edinburgh Depression Scale during pregnancy. J Psychosom Res. 2011, 70 (4): 385-389. 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2010.07.008.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Adewuya AO, Ola BA, Dada AO, Fasoto OO: Validation of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale as a screening tool for depression in late pregnancy among Nigerian women. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 2006, 27 (4): 267-272. 10.1080/01674820600915478.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Tesfaye M, Hanlon C, Wondimagegn D, Alem A: Detecting postnatal common mental disorders in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: validation of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale and Kessler Scales. J Affect Disord. 2010, 122 (1–2): 102-108.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Webster J, Linnane JW, Dibley LM, Hinson JK, Starrenburg SE, Roberts JA: Measuring social support in pregnancy: can it be simple and meaningful?. Birth. 2000, 27 (2): 97-101. 10.1046/j.1523-536x.2000.00097.x.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. WHO: Maternal mental health and child health and development in low and middle income countries: report of the meeting held in Geneva, 30 January - 1 February, 2008. 2008, World Health Organization, http://www.who.int/mental_health/prevention/suicide/mmh_jan08_meeting_report.pdf,Google Scholar
  51. Pre-publication history

    1. The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here:http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2393/13/135/prepub

Copyright

© Dibaba et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2013

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.