Trial reportBMC psychiatry2025
Electronic Measurement-based care (eMBC) for perinatal depression and anxiety: a pilot randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC psychiatry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04836585 (Technology-Enabled), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Technology-Enabled (Electronic) Measurement Based Care(MBC) for Perinatal Depression and Anxiety: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAs few as 20% of perinatal patients with depression or anxiety are treated to remission. Measurement-based care (MBC) improves patient outcomes but has not been evaluated for perinatal mental illness. We aimed to assess the feasibility of an MBC protocol in perinatal patients experiencing depression and/or anxiety symptoms.
methodsIn this pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT), perinatal people with Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) scores ≥ 13 were randomized 1:1 to (1) an electronic MBC (eMBC) intervention embedded in an electronic health record (EHR) that included scales assessing symptoms and functioning at each clinical visit or (2) usual care, for 12 weeks post-randomization. The primary outcome was feasibility (recruitment, acceptability, trial protocol adherence). While not powered to detect clinically significant differences on clinical outcomes, we also measured depressive and anxiety symptoms (Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale, MADRS; Hamilton Anxiety Scale, HAM-A).
resultsOf 42 participants (n = 21/arm), 32 (76.2%) completed follow-up questionnaires. At least one scale was completed in 87.5% of clinical encounters, but only 68.8% of encounters included documented participant-provider discussion of the results. Acceptability was good, with opportunities identified for improvement from participant and provider perspectives. At 12-weeks post-randomization, MADRS and HAM-A scores were non-signficantly lower in the eMBC group (mean differences: -1.10, 95%CI -7.81 to 5.61; -1.28, 95%CI -4.69 to 2.12).
conclusionsThe protocol evaluated in this study was feasible, which supports proceeding to a larger RCT to evaluate efficacy with minor modifications. If effective, an EHR-integrated eMBC intervention for perintal depression and anxiety could be implemented widely.
trial registrationThe trial was registered at www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov (NCT04836585). Registration Date: 08/04/2021.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.