IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0205243.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is cognitive behavioral therapy a better choice for women with postnatal depression? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Lili Huang
  • Yunzhi Zhao
  • Chunfang Qiang
  • Bozhen Fan

Abstract

The present study evaluated the combined effectiveness of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for postnatal depression. A systematic search was conducted across databases including PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane library to identify the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessing CBT versus control for postnatal depression until March 2017. Data was extracted by two reviewers, independently. The Review Manager 5.3 and Stata 11.0 were used to calculate the synthesized effect of CBT on depression, and anxiety. A total of 20 RCTs involving 3623 participants were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that CBT was associated with a better Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) than control in short-term (mean difference = -2.86, 95% CI: -4.41–-1.31; P

Suggested Citation

  • Lili Huang & Yunzhi Zhao & Chunfang Qiang & Bozhen Fan, 2018. "Is cognitive behavioral therapy a better choice for women with postnatal depression? A systematic review and meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(10), pages 1-16, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0205243
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0205243
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0205243
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0205243&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0205243?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Billie Lever Taylor & Kate Cavanagh & Clara Strauss, 2016. "The Effectiveness of Mindfulness-Based Interventions in the Perinatal Period: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(5), pages 1-29, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Catarina Luís & Maria Cristina Canavarro & Ana Fonseca, 2019. "Men’s Intentions to Recommend Professional Help-Seeking to Their Partners in the Postpartum Period: the Direct and Indirect Effects of Gender-Role Conflict," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(20), pages 1-19, October.
    2. Natalia Ruiz-Segovia & Maria Fe Rodriguez-Muñoz & Maria Eugenia Olivares & Nuria Izquierdo & Pluvio Coronado & Huynh-Nhu Le, 2021. "Healthy Moms and Babies Preventive Psychological Intervention Application: A Study Protocol," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(23), pages 1-13, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. McDaid, David & Park, A-La & Wahlbeck, Kristian, 2019. "The economic case for the prevention of mental illness," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 100054, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Allysa D. Quick & Irene Tung & Kate Keenan & Alison E. Hipwell, 2023. "Psychological Well-Being Across the Perinatal Period: Life Satisfaction and Flourishing in a Longitudinal Study of Young Black and White American Women," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 1283-1301, March.
    3. Fallon Cluxton-Keller & Martha L Bruce, 2018. "Clinical effectiveness of family therapeutic interventions in the prevention and treatment of perinatal depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(6), pages 1-18, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0205243. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.