Skip to main content
Wellcome Open Research logoLink to Wellcome Open Research
. 2020 Aug 25;5:108. Originally published 2020 May 29. [Version 2] doi: 10.12688/wellcomeopenres.15925.2

Depressive symptoms measured using the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale in mothers and partners in the ALSPAC Study: A data note

Elise Paul 1,a, Rebecca M Pearson 1
PMCID: PMC7385546  PMID: 32766456

Version Changes

Revised. Amendments from Version 1

We have added several citations of prior work as suggested by the reviewers and directed readers to ALSPAC's catalogue of publications. We clarified what we present in Figures 4 and 5. We have also fixed some typographical errors.

Abstract

Depression is a leading cause of disability and is associated with a number of adverse offspring outcomes when it occurs in parents. Depression is present in men and women at different rates, and recent research suggests that symptom profiles between the sexes may differ. Longitudinal data are needed to answer remaining questions about the long-term course, gender differences, antecedents and outcomes of depression. The Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) is a large birth cohort study in England which administered one of the most commonly used depression instruments, the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) at 11 timepoints in mothers and at 10 timepoints in their partners. In addition to repeated measurements of the EPDS, ALSPAC has a wealth of participant data on biological, social, demographic, and lifestyle factors. The purpose of this data note is to introduce potential users of the data to the characteristics of the EPDS in ALSPAC, as well as some key considerations when using the data.

Keywords: ALSPAC, depression, longitudinal cohort, EPDS, intergenerational, gender

Introduction

Depression is one of the common mental disorders and is a leading cause of disability worldwide 1. Previous research has also shown that individuals suffering from depression are at increased risk of transmitting this and other mental health problems to their offspring 24. Understanding how depression unfolds over time as well as its risk factors in general population samples is therefore an urgent public health priority.

Population wide studies consistently show that depression is more common in women than in men 5. Depression in the perinatal period has received an increasing amount of research attention. Research indicates that depression in both mothers and fathers in the time before and shortly after the birth of a child is common 6 and is linked with a range of negative offspring outcomes in longitudinal studies 3, 4, 710.

The Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) is a birth cohort study of over 20,000 women, partners and their children that started in the early 1990s. Data collection is still ongoing and includes a wealth of repeated measurements of personality characteristics, mental health, biological measurements, lifestyle factors and sociodemographic information. One of these repeated measurements is of depressive symptoms via the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) 11, the most widely used perinatal depression instrument which has been translated into over 60 languages 12. Because the EPDS was originally developed to measure depression in the perinatal period, somatic depression symptoms (e.g. fatigue or changes in appetite) were omitted. Despite its original intended use, the EPDS is also used to assess depressive symptoms outside of the perinatal period 1316 and is administered to fathers as well 4, 17.

Over a dozen published ALSPAC studies have used EPDS data in mothers, partners, or both mothers and partners 8, 16, 1828. One early finding using ALSPAC data is that depressive symptoms were just as common during pregnancy as in the postnatal period 29. Another ALSPAC study found that adolescents of mothers who had been depressed during and shortly after pregnancy were at significant risk for a diagnosis of depression 10. More recently it was demonstrated that the prevalence of depression in pregnancy is higher (25%) in the second generation of ALSPAC mothers than in the first (17%) 30.

There are still many unanswered questions regarding depression in mothers and partners. The aim of this data note is to describe the longitudinal data on maternal and partner depression available from ALSPAC to facilitate future research on depression.

Methods

The ALSPAC sample

The Avon Longitudinal Study of parents and Children (ALSPAC) is a longitudinal birth cohort that recruited pregnant women residing in Avon, UK with expected dates of delivery between 1 April 1991 and 31 December 1992. The initial number of pregnancies was 14,541, which resulted in 14,062 live births and 13,988 children alive by the age of 1 year. Further details on the representativeness, cohort profile and recruitment have been published elsewhere 3133. The ALSPAC study website contains details of all data available through a fully searchable data dictionary and variable search tool.

Fathers were not initially enrolled in the study directly 34. Instead, mothers were sent a questionnaire with the option of passing it on to him to complete. Consequently, no information on the number of mothers who invited their partners to participate is available. At least one questionnaire was returned by 75% of the partners of enrolled women.

Starting in 2014, study data were collected and managed using REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture) version 7.4.9 hosted at the University of Bristol 35, 36. REDCap is a secure, web-based software platform designed to support data capture for research studies.

Ethical approval and consent

Ethical approval for the study was obtained from the ALSPAC Law and Ethics Committee and the local research ethics committees. Full details of the approvals are available from the study website.

Written informed consent for the use of data collected via questionnaires and clinics was obtained from participants following the recommendations of the ALSPAC Ethics and Law Committee at the time.

EPDS administration in ALSPAC

The EPDS was administered to ALSPAC mothers and their partners at 11 and 10 timepoints, respectively. Table 1, Table 2 present a complete list of these data collection timepoints which correspond to the focal child’s average age within ALSPAC, as well as the ALSPAC data file and variable names. Nine of the timepoints are the same in both mothers and partners with respect to the focal child’s age: 18 weeks’ gestation, 8 weeks’ post-partum, 8 months, 1 year 9 months, 2 years 9 months, 5 years 1 month, 6 years 1 month, 8 years 1 month, and 11 years 2 months.

Table 1. Source of Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) item-level data, child age at measurement, and mother variable names in ALSPAC.

Occasion Child age Source File in ALSPAC List of Mother EPDS Variable Names in ALSPAC
1 18 wks. gestation b_4f b360 b361 b362 b363 b364 b365 b366 b367 b368 b369
2 32 wks. gestation c_8a c590 c591 c592 c593 c594 c595 c596 c597 c598 c599
3 8 wks. post-partum e_4f e380 e381 e382 e383 e384 e385 e386 e387 e388 e389
4 8 mos. post-partum f_2b f190 f191 f192 f193 f194 f195 f196 f197 f198 f199
5 1 yr. 9 mos. post-partum g_5c g280 g281 g282 g283 g284 g285 g286 g287 g288 g289
6 2 yrs. 9 mos. post-partum h_6d h190 h191 h192 h193 h194 h195 h196 h197 h198 h199
7 5 yrs. 1 mo. post-partum k_r1b k3030 k3031 k3032 k3033 k3034 k3035 k3036 k3037 k3038 k3039
8 6 yrs. 1 mo. post-partum l_r1b l2010 l2011 l2012 l2013 l2014 l2015 l2016 l2017 l2018 l2019
9 8 yrs. 1 mo. post-partum n_3a n6060 n6061 n6062 n6063 n6064 n6065 n6066 n6067 n6068 n6069
10 11 yrs. 2 mos. post-partum r_r1b r4010 r4011 r4012 r4013 r4014 r4015 r4016 r4017 r4018 r4019
11 18 yrs. post-partum t_2a t3240 t3241 t3242 t3243 t3244 t3245 t3246 t3247 t3248 t3249

Table 2. Source of Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) item-level data, child age at measurement, and partner variable names in ALSPAC.

Occasion Child age Source File
in ALSPAC
List of Partner EPDS Variable Names in ALSPAC
1 18 wks. gestation pb_4b pb250, pb251, pb252, pb253, pb254, pb255, pb256, pb257, pb258, pb259
2 8 wks. post-partum pc_3a pc092, pc093, pc094, pc095, pc096, pc097, pc098, pc099, pc100, pc101
3 8 mos. post-partum pd_7b pd190, pd191, pd192, pd193, pd194, pd195, pd196, pd197, pd198, pd199
4 1 yr. 9 mos. post-partum pe_4a pe280, pe281, pe282, pe283, pe284, pe285, pe286, pe287, pe288, pe289
5 2 yrs. 9 mos. post-partum pf_r1a pf4030, pf4031, pf4032, pf4033, pf4034, pf4035, pf4036, pf4037, pf4038, pf4039
6 5 yrs. 1 mo. post-partum ph_1c ph3030, ph3031, ph3032, ph3033, ph3034, ph3035, ph3036, ph3037, ph3038, ph3039
7 6 yrs. 1 mo. post-partum pj_r1a pj2010, pj2011, pj2012, pj2013, pj2014, pj2015, pj2016, pj2017, pj2018, pj2019
8 8 yrs. 1 mo. post-partum pl_r1b pl6060, pl6061, pl6062, pl6063, pl6064, pl6065, pl6066, pl6067, pl6068, pl6069
9 11 yrs. 2 mos. post-partum pp_r1b pp4010, pp4011, pp4012, pp4013, pp4014, pp4015, pp4016, pp4017, pp4018, pp4019
10 21 yrs. post-partum fa_1b fa3240, fa3241, fa3242, fa3243, fa3244, fa3245, fa3246, fa3247, fa3248, fa3249

Description of the population

Due to attrition and other sources of missing data, sample size of mothers with EPDS data at each timepoint varies, from 12,151 at 18 weeks’ gestation to 4,107 at 18 years post-partum. In partners (all of whom were male), sample sizes vary from 9,846 at 18 weeks’ gestation to 1,951 at 21 years post-partum ( Table 3, Table 4). A total of 14,169 mothers have valid EPDS data for at least one timepoint, with 2,854 of these having EPDS data for all 11 timepoints, and 1,476 mothers have data for zero EPDS assessments. In partners, 14,915 have at least one EPDS assessment, with 4,067 having all 10 assessments and 1,476 having zero. As can be seen in Table 5, Table 6, missingness on EPDS data appears to be related to several demographic characteristics.

Table 3. Descriptive statistics and reliability of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) in mothers in ALSPAC.

Occasion Mean Maternal
Age (SD)
Mean Child Age (SD) Sample
Size
Mean
EPDS (SD)
Above EPDS
Threshold
(≥13)
Above EPDS
Threshold
(≥10)
α
1 27.76 (4.93) 20.85 (5.66) wks. gest. 12,151 6.99 (4.87) 13.91% 28.17% 0.849
2 28.64 (4.86) 32.65 (1.55) wks. gest. 12,190 7.09 (5.09) 15.23% 29.99% 0.866
3 29.05 (4.82) 9.93 (3.72) wks. post 11,816 6.06 (4.79) 10.16% 21.56% 0.857
4 29.20 (4.77) 8.77 (1.49) mos. 11,318 5.42 (4.70) 8.82% 17.79% 0.867
5 29.97 (4.75) 21.15 (1.18) mos. 10,384 5.72 (4.80) 9.87% 19.98% 0.868
6 32.05 (4.73) 2.81 (0.12) yrs. 9,667 6.29 (5.05) 12.39% 24.11% 0.882
7 34.00 (4.66) 5.13 (0.11) yrs. 8,937 6.05 (5.04) 12.38% 22.66% 0.885
8 35.08 (4.61) 6.17 (0.55) yrs. 8,526 6.35 (5.15) 13.52% 25.63% 0.889
9 37.76 (4.58) 8.26 (0.26) yrs. 7,762 6.14 (5.21) 12.77% 24.05% 0.884
10 40.32 (4.62) 11.28 (0.15) yrs. 7,512 5.81 (5.29) 12.55% 22.64% 0.888
11 48.60 (4.48) 18.47 (0.52) yrs. 4,107 7.47 (5.45) 18.24% 32.36% 0.884

Table 4. Descriptive statistics and reliability of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) in partners in ALSPAC.

Occasion Mean
Partner
Age (SD)
Mean Child Age (SD) Sample
Size
Mean EPDS
(SD)
Above EPDS
Threshold
(≥13)
Above EPDS
Threshold
(≥10)
α
1 30.40 (5.77) 20.23 (3.50) wks. gest. 9,846 4.23 (3.94) 4.08% 10.54% 0.812
2 31.08 (5.73) 10.28 (4.49) wks. post 8,428 3.79 (3.85) 3.60% 9.07% 0.825
3 31.81 (5.53) 8.66 (1.59) mos. 7,165 3.36 (3.70) 2.96% 7.31% 0.823
4 33.24 (5.02) 21.45 (1.22) mos. 6,167 3.66 (3.82) 3.50% 8.46% 0.840
5 34.30 (5.62) 2.85 (0.17) yrs. 5,387 3.79 (3.88) 3.81% 9.17% 0.833
6 36.62 5.17 (0.11) yrs. 4,496 3.95 (4.01) 4.34% 10.36% 0.852
7 37.86 (5.62) 6.18 (0.17) yrs. 4,449 4.46 (4.37) 6.32% 13.98% 0.863
8 39.94 8.26 (0.30) yrs. 3,939 4.27 (4.41) 6.12% 12.77% 0.866
9 43.24 (5.54) 11.28 (0.15) yrs. 3,586 3.93 (4.35) 5.52% 11.85% 0.859
10 53.34 (5.40) 20.24 (0.63) yrs. 1,951 5.85 (4.69) 9.17% 20.30% 0.856

Description of the population

The EPDS was administered to ALSPAC mothers and their partners at 11 and 10 timepoints, respectively. Table 2, Table 3 present a complete list of these data collection timepoints which correspond to the focal child’s average age within ALSPAC, as well as the ALSPAC data file and variable names. Nine of the timepoints are the same in both mothers and partners with respect to the focal child’s age: 18 weeks’ gestation, 8 weeks’ post-partum, 8 months, 1 year 9 months, 2 years 9 months, 5 years 1 month, 6 years 1 month, 8 years 1 month, and 11 years 2 months.

Due to attrition and other sources of missing data, sample size of mothers with EPDS data at each timepoint varies, from 12,151 at 18 weeks’ gestation to 4,107 at 18 years post-partum. In partners, sample sizes vary from 9,846 at 18 weeks’ gestation to 1,951 at 21 years post-partum ( Table 4, Table 5). A total of 14,169 mothers have valid EPDS data for at least one timepoint, with 2,854 of these having EPDS data for all 11 timepoints, and 1,476 mothers have data for zero EPDS assessments. In partners, 14,915 have at least one EPDS assessment, with 4,067 having all 10 assessments and 1,476 having zero. As can be seen in Tables 6- 7, missingness on EPDS data appears to be related to several demographic characteristics.

Table 5. Mother demographic characteristics by number of EPDS measurements in ALSPAC.

No EPDS One to
ten EPDS
All eleven
EPDS
Maternal Education at 32 wks. gestation (n = 12,483)
O Level or lower 92.86% 69.68% 47.88%
A Level or Higher 7.14% 30.32% 52.12%
Maternal Social Class at 18 wks. gestation (n = 11,117)
Skilled non-manual or lower 71.43% 71.85% 57.45%
Professional/Managerial/Technical 28.57% 28.15% 42.55%
Mother Parity (n = 13,114)
First Born 56.58% 43.82% 47.80%
Second Born 19.74% 34.58% 36.68%
Third + Born 23.68% 21.59% 15.52%
Maternal Age at child’s birth (n = 14,065)
< 25 Years 42.18% 27.02% 9.74%
25-29 34.08% 39.06% 37.67%
30-34 16.20% 25.13% 38.09%
35+ 7.54% 8.80% 14.51%

Table 6. Partner demographic characteristics by number of EPDS measurements in ALSPAC.

No EPDS One to
nine EPDS
All ten
EPDS
Partner Education at 32 wks. gestation (n = 12,001)
O Level or lower 30.35% 54.65% 72.91%
A Level or Higher 69.65% 45.65% 27.09%
Partner Social Class at 32 wks. gestation (n = 10,378)
Professional/Managerial/Technical 64.64% 39.15% 31.73%
Skilled non-manual or lower 35.36% 60.85% 68.27%
Partner Parity at 12 wks. gestation (n = 8,736)
First Born 46.78% 47.22% 46.50%
Second + Born 53.22% 52.78% 53.50%
Partner Age at 18 wks. gestation (n = 9,652)
< 25 Years 1.23% 13.89% 30.95%
25-29 25.00% 35.22% 23.81%
30-34 43.17% 31.59% 33.33%
35+ 30.60% 19.29% 11.90%

Table 7. Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) questions.

Responses
1 I have been able to laugh and see the funny side of things As much as I always could; Not quite so
much now; Definitely not so much now; Not at all
2 I have looked forward with enjoyment to things As much as I ever did; Rather less than I used to; Definitely less than
I used to; Hardly at all
3 I have blamed myself unnecessarily when things went
wrong
Yes, most of the time; Yes, some of the time; Not very often; No
never
4 I have been anxious or worried for no good reason No, not at all; Hardly ever; Yes, sometimes; Yes, often
5 I have felt scared or panicky for no very good
reason
Yes, quite a lot; Yes, sometimes; No, not much; No, not at all
6 Things have been getting on top of me Yes, most of the time; Yes, sometimes; No, hardly ever; No, not at all
7 I have been so unhappy that I have had difficulty
sleeping
Yes, most of the time; Yes, sometimes; Not very often; No, not all
8 I have felt sad or miserable Yes, most of the time; Yes, quite often; Not very often; No, not at all
9 I have been so unhappy that I have been crying Yes, most of the time; Yes, quite often; Only occasionally; No, never
10 The thought of harming myself has occurred to me Yes, quite often; Sometimes; Hardly ever; Never

The Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS)

The 10-item Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) 11 assesses depressive symptoms during the prior week. Respondents rate the frequency of each symptom on a Likert-type scale with four response options, the exact wording of which varies depending on the item. See Table 7 for a complete item list with corresponding response options. Responses from all ten questions are coded 0–3 and three items (1, 2, and 4) are reverse coded. All ten items are then summed to give a score ranging between 0 and 30, where higher scores indicate more depressive symptoms. The EPDS does not assess or provide information on the duration or intensity of depressive symptoms 12.

A score of 13 or higher on the EPDS is often used to indicate probable depression 11, 37. Others have used cut-off points of 12 38, 39 and 10 17. For simplicity, we present descriptive statistics using 10 and 13 as cut-offs. Syntax for creating the scores is available upon request.

Characteristics of the EPDS in ALSPAC

The mean number of EPDS depressive symptoms and the prevalence of probable depression using both the 13 and 10 or greater cut-offs for mothers and partners are presented in Table 3, Table 4. In mothers, the greatest prevalence of depression occurs at 18 years post-partum, while the lowest is at 8 months’ post-partum ( Table 3). In partners, the greatest proportion with probable depression occurs at 21 years post-partum, while the lowest proportion is at 8 months’ post-partum ( Table 4).

Correlations of depressive symptoms between timepoints within mothers and partners are moderate (0.30 to 0.49) to large (< 0.50) ( Table 8, Table 9), providing initial evidence for predictive validity. Correlations between mother and partner depressive symptoms at the same timepoints are small to moderate (0.228-0.294) ( Table 10). Data users modelling depressive symptoms over time should use statistical methods to account for these correlations. Internal reliability of the EPDS at each timepoint for both mothers and partners in ALSPAC is good ( Table 3, Table 4).

Table 8. Table of correlations between EPDS scores on all occasions in mothers in ALSPAC.

18 wks.
gestation
32 wks.
gestation
8 wks.
post-partum
8
mos.
1 yr. 9
mos.
2 yrs. 9
mos.
5 yrs.
1 mo.
6 yrs.
1 mo.
8 yrs.
1 mo.
11 yrs.
2 mos.
18
yrs.
32 wks. gestation 0.643 -
8 wks. post-partum 0.529 0.573 -
8 mos. 0.502 0.549 0.614 -
1 yr. 9 mos. 0.488 0.520 0.558 0.615 -
2 yrs. 9 mos. 0.471 0.495 0.515 0.577 0.619 -
5 yrs. 1 mo. 0.436 0.460 0.459 0.499 0.540 0.581 -
6 yrs. 1 mo. 0.419 0.448 0.458 0.495 0.514 0.550 0.628 -
8 yrs. 1 mo. 0.405 0.424 0.417 0.451 0.500 0.517 0.570 0.579 -
11 yrs. 2 mos. 0.402 0.407 0.414 0.437 0.477 0.492 0.514 0.513 0.552 -
18 yrs. 0.362 0.382 0.397 0.403 0.435 0.435 0.472 0.454 0.465 0.490 -

Table 9. Table of correlations between EPDS scores on all occasions in partners in ALSPAC.

18 wks.
gestation
8 wks. post-
partum
8
mos.
1 yr. 9
mos.
2 yrs.
9 mos.
5 yrs.
1 mo.
6 yrs.
1 mo.
8 yrs.
1 mo.
11 yrs.
2 mos.
20
yrs.
8 wks. post-partum 0.578 -
8 mos. 0.555 0.591 -
1 yr. 9 mos. 0.520 0.554 0.584 -
2 yrs. 9 mos. 0.472 0.493 0.526 0.605 -
5 yrs. 1 mo. 0.422 0.461 0.471 0.514 0.537 -
6 yrs. 1 mo. 0.445 0.460 0.479 0.496 0.491 0.631 -
8 yrs. 1 mo. 0.407 0.419 0.441 0.455 0.462 0.513 0.567 -
11 yrs. 2 mos. 0.390 0.418 0.403 0.447 0.423 0.523 0.532 0.542 -
20 yrs. 0.368 0.377 0.368 0.378 0.347 0.477 0.430 0.429 0.493 -

Table 10. Table of correlations between EPDS scores on all nine common occasions in mothers and partners in ALSPAC.

Mother at
18 wks.
gestation
Mother at 8
wks. post-
partum
Mother
at 8
mos.
Mother
at 1 yr.
9 mos.
Mother
at 2 yrs.
9 mos.
Mother
at 5 yrs.
1 mo.
Mother
at 6 yrs.
1 mo.
Mother
at 8 yrs.
1 mo.
Mother
at 11 yrs.
2 mos.
Partner at 18 wks. gestation 0.249 0.192 0.175 0.175 0.161 0.140 0.131 0.122 0.118
Partner at 8 wks. post-partum 0.190 0.268 0.213 0.191 0.181 0.153 0.154 0.134 0.124
Partner at 8 mos. 0.218 0.221 0.280 0.220 0.202 0.182 0.180 0.150 0.131
Partner at 1 yr. 9 mos. 0.209 0.224 0.237 0.294 0.236 0.185 0.180 0.164 0.160
Partner at 2 yrs. 9 mos. 0.188 0.194 0.206 0.227 0.263 0.181 0.174 0.152 0.154
Partner at 5 yrs. 1 mo. 0.176 0.170 0.165 0.191 0.210 0.261 0.214 0.187 0.175
Partner at 6 yrs. 1 mo. 0.167 0.189 0.204 0.213 0.198 0.208 0.272 0.193 0.198
Partner at 8 yrs. 1 mo. 0.131 0.134 0.130 0.179 0.139 0.155 0.180 0.228 0.198
Partner at 11 yrs. 2 mos. 0.133 0.131 0.133 0.166 0.150 0.140 0.159 0.137 0.235

As can be seen in Tables 4 and 5, mothers’ depressive symptoms and rates of probable depression are consistently higher than their partners’. This is congruent with other research on gender differences in depression 40. Figure 1 provides a visual representation of the differences in mothers and partners in the average number of depressive symptoms over time. The mean number of depressive symptoms are also presented in histograms at each timepoint for mothers ( Figure 2) and partners ( Figure 3).

Figure 1. Mean number of EPDS depressive symptoms in mothers and partners according to average participant age.

Figure 1.

Figure 2. Histograms for the number of Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) symptoms in mothers at each of the eleven occasions in ALSPAC.

Figure 2.

Figure 3. Histograms for the number of Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) symptoms in partners at each of the ten occasions in ALSPAC.

Figure 3.

To help further illustrate these gender differences, Figure 4, Figure 5 present the distribution of the means (on a scale of 0–3) for each specific EPDS item in mothers and partners at all timepoints. In both mothers and partners, a common depressive symptom appears to be unnecessary self-blame. In mothers, being sad/miserable and anxious/worried are common symptoms, while in fathers, anxiety/worry and feeling overwhelmed (“things getting too much”) are common.

Figure 4. Means (scale of 0–3) of each specific Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) symptom at each of the eleven occasions in ALSPAC mothers.

Figure 4.

Figure 5. Means (scale of 0–3) of each specific Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) symptom at each of the eleven occasions in ALSPAC partners.

Figure 5.

Some researchers have investigated whether the EPDS total score can be disaggregated into meaningful subscales 41. Using the ALSPAC data, Coates and colleagues 42 identified a three-factor solution to fit maternal EPDS data at 18 and 32 weeks’ gestation and 8 weeks and 8 months post-partum. The three factors were anhedonia (EPDS items 1 and 2), anxiety (EPDS items 3–6), and depression (EPDS items 7-10), similar to what others have found 42, 43.

We examined the fit of these three subscales using EPDS data in ALSPAC ( Figure 6) for mothers and partners at 18 weeks’ gestation and 11 years 2 months post-partum. Model fit statistics indicated generally good fit at both timepoints in both mothers and partners ( Table 11). Correlations between the three subscales within and between parents at 18 weeks’ gestation are presented in Table 12. Associations were strongest within rather than between parents.

Figure 6. Factor structure of Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) symptom sub-scales.

Figure 6.

Table 11. Model fit statistics for EPDS sub-scales in mothers and partners in ALSPAC.

Mothers Partners
RMSEA (90% CI) CFI TLI RMSEA (95% CI) CFI TLI
18 wks. gestation (T1) 0.060 (0.057-0.062) 0.966 0.952 0.059 (0.056-0.062) 0.959 0.943
11 years 2 mos. post-partum
(T9 partners T10 for mums)
0.076 (0.072-0.079) 0.961 0.946 0.067 (0.063-0.072) 0.961 0.946

CFI= comparative fit index; TLI= Tucker–Lewis index; RMSEA= root mean square error of approximation.

Table 12. Correlations between EPDS sub-scales in mothers and partners in ALSPAC at 18 wks. gestation.

Mother
Anhedonia
Mother
Anxiety
Mother
Depression
Partner
Anhedonia
Partner
Anxiety
Partner
Depression
Mother Anhedonia -
Mother Anxiety 0.428 -
Mother Depression 0.509 0.630 -
Partner Anhedonia 0.161 0.141 0.168 -
Partner Anxiety 0.141 0.197 0.185 0.383 -
Partner Depression 0.142 0.161 0.219 0.461 0.564 -

Related constructs in ALSPAC

Researchers using the EPDS in ALSPAC may want to take advantage of the wealth of information collected on related constructs. In addition to EPDS data in partners at 10 timepoints and in offspring, measures of anxiety, personality, nutrition, IQ, and biological characteristics such as genetic markers are available in ALSPAC. Users of ALSPAC data may consult the searchable database for additional constructs which may be of interest.

ALSPAC publications using the EPDS

Over a dozen peer-reviewed papers that have used the EPDS in ALSPAC have now been published 2, 4, 8, 10, 18, 24, 28, 30, 4448). Interested readers can browse ALSPAC’s catalogue of over 2,000 current and published research papers on the study website.

Considerations for the data

Like all longitudinal studies, missing data due to attrition must be taken into consideration when using ALSPAC data. However, due to the rich nature of information related to missingness in ALSPAC, users will be able to deal with missing data in a competent manner. Table 5, Table 6 list several of the potential characteristics which users can use to account for missing EPDS data. Users should take steps to handle missing data appropriately.

Strengths and limitations of the data

A major strength of the ALSPAC data is the number of participants and that it is a general population sample. Another strength is the number of time points at which the entire EPDS was administered, thus providing identical assessments over time, and that it was administered not only to mothers but also to their partners. ALSPAC is therefore a rich resource for further exploration of questions related to gender differences in the presentation of depression. One possibility for future research with the ALSPAC data is to investigate whether there are gender differences in the depression symptom profiles of men and women 49. Some research indicates that when men are classified as being depressed by including symptoms such as risk-taking behaviour, anger attacks, and substance abuse, they are just as likely to meet criteria for depression as women 50.

A third advantage is that the offspring of the original cohort are now starting to have their own children, and these mothers, as well as their partners, are also being administered the EPDS. Two generations of EPDS data in mothers and partners are therefore available, enabling researchers to answer important questions about intergenerational depression. The data can also be linked to the wide range of other information already collected on mothers, partners and their children.

One limitation of the data is that the EPDS was not designed to measure information on the duration or intensity of depressive symptoms 12. A further limitation is the lack of consistency in the timing of measurement in mother and partner depressive symptoms in late childhood and adolescence. Both mothers and partners were administered the EPDS at child age 11 years 2 months, but the EPDS was not subsequently given to mothers until child age 18 and to partners at child age 21. The timing of these assessments will therefore somewhat limit questions which can be asked regarding depression in parents of adolescents. Another limitation of the ALSPAC data concerns racial and ethnic diversity. There are insufficient numbers of non-white participants to enable sub-group analyses.

Data availability

Underlying data

ALSPAC data are available through a system of managed open access. The application steps for ALSPAC data access are highlighted below.

1. Please read the ALSPAC access policy which describes the process of accessing the data in detail, and outlines the costs associated with doing so.

2. You may also find it useful to browse the fully searchable research proposals database, which lists all research projects that have been approved since April 2011.

3. Please submit your research proposal for consideration by the ALSPAC Executive Committee. You will receive a response within 10 working days to advise you whether your proposal has been approved. If you have any questions about accessing data, please email alspac-data@bristol.ac.uk.

Acknowledgments

We are extremely grateful to all the families who took part in this study, the midwives for their help in recruiting them, and the whole ALSPAC team, which includes interviewers, computer and laboratory technicians, clerical workers, research scientists, volunteers, managers, receptionists and nurses.

Funding Statement

This work was supported by Wellcome through core support to ALSPAC [102215]. The UK Medical Research Council and Wellcome and the University of Bristol currently provide core support for ALSPAC. This publication is the work of the authors and Elise Paul and Rebecca Pearson will serve as guarantors for the contents of this paper. A comprehensive list of grants funding is available on the ALSPAC website: http://www.bristol.ac.uk/alspac/external/documents/grant-acknowledgements.pdf . This study was supported by the European Research Council under the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme [grant FP/2007-2013]/ European Research Council Grant Agreements [grants 758813; MHINT and 669545].

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

[version 2; peer review: 2 approved]

References

  • 1. Vos T, Allen C, Arora M, et al. : Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 310 diseases and injuries, 1990–2015: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015. Lancet. 2016;388(10053):1545–1602. 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31678-6 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Hammerton G, Zammit S, Thapar A, et al. : Explaining risk for suicidal ideation in adolescent offspring of mothers with depression. Psychol Med. 2016;46(2):265–75. 10.1017/S0033291715001671 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. Netsi E, Pearson RM, Murray L, et al. : Association of persistent and severe postnatal depression With child outcomes. JAMA Psychiatry. 2018;75(3):247–253. 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2017.4363 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4. Gutierrez-Galve L, Stein A, Hanington L, et al. : Association of maternal and paternal depression in the postnatal period with offspring depression at age 18 years. JAMA Psychiatry. 2019;76(3):290–296. 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2018.3667 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5. Rehm J, Shield KD: Global Burden of Disease and the Impact of Mental and Addictive Disorders. Curr Psychiatry Rep. 2019;21(2):10. 10.1007/s11920-019-0997-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6. Rao WW, Zhu XM, Zong QQ, et al. : Prevalence of prenatal and postpartum depression in fathers: A comprehensive meta-analysis of observational surveys. J Affect Disord. 2020;263:491–499. 10.1016/j.jad.2019.10.030 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7. Psychogiou L, Russell G, Owens M: Parents’ postnatal depressive symptoms and their children’s academic attainment at 16 years: Pathways of risk transmission. Br J Psychol. 2020;111(1):1–16. 10.1111/bjop.12378 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8. Ramchandani P, Stein A, Evans J, et al. : Paternal depression in the postnatal period and child development: a prospective population study. Lancet. 2005;365(9478):2201–5. 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)66778-5 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9. O’connor TG, Heron J, Glover V: Antenatal anxiety predicts child behavioral/emotional problems independently of postnatal depression. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2002;41(12):1470–7. 10.1097/00004583-200212000-00019 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10. Pearson RM, Evans J, Kounali D, et al. : Maternal depression during pregnancy and the postnatal period: risks and possible mechanisms for offspring depression at age 18 years. JAMA Psychiatry. 2013;70(12):1312–9. 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2013.2163 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Cox JL, Holden JM, Sagovsky R: Detection of postnatal depression. Development of the 10-item Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale. Br J Psychiatry. 1987;150:782–6. 10.1192/bjp.150.6.782 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Cox J: Use and misuse of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS): a ten point ‘survival analysis’. Arch Womens Ment Health. 2017;20(6):789–790. 10.1007/s00737-017-0789-7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13. Cox JL, Chapman G, Murray D, et al. : Validation of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) in non-postnatal women. J Affect Disord. 1996;39(3):185–9. 10.1016/0165-0327(96)00008-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14. Thorpe K: A study of the use of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale with parent groups outside the postpartum period. J Reprod Infant Psychol. 1993;11(2):119–125. 10.1080/02646839308403204 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 15. Thorpe KJ, Dragonas T, Golding J: The effects of psychosocial factors on the mother’s emotional well-being during early parenthood: a cross-cultural study of Britain and Greece. J Reprod Infant Psychol. 1992;10(4):205–217. 10.1080/02646839208403954 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 16. Fergusson DM, Horwood LJ, Thorpe K: Changes in depression during and following pregnancy. ALSPAC Study Team. Study of Pregnancy and Children. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 1996;10(3):279–93. 10.1111/j.1365-3016.1996.tb00051.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17. Edmondson OJ, Psychogiou L, Vlachos H, et al. : Depression in fathers in the postnatal period: assessment of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale as a screening measure. J Affect Disord. 2010;125(1–3):365–8. 10.1016/j.jad.2010.01.069 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18. Barker ED, Kirkham N, Ng J, et al. : Prenatal maternal depression symptoms and nutrition, and child cognitive function. Br J Psychiatry. 2013;203(6):417–21. 10.1192/bjp.bp.113.129486 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19. Micali N, Simonoff E, Treasure J: Pregnancy and post-partum depression and anxiety in a longitudinal general population cohort: the effect of eating disorders and past depression. J Affect Disord. 2011;131(1–3):150–7. 10.1016/j.jad.2010.09.034 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20. Drewett R, Blair P, Emmett P, et al. : Failure to thrive in the term and preterm infants of mothers depressed in the postnatal period: a population-based birth cohort study. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2004;45(2):359–66. 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2004.00226.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21. Northstone K, Joinson C, Emmett P: Dietary patterns and depressive symptoms in a UK cohort of men and women: a longitudinal study. Public Health Nutr. 2018;21(5):831–837. 10.1017/S1368980017002324 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22. Pearson RM, Campbell A, Howard LM, et al. : Impact of dysfunctional maternal personality traits on risk of offspring depression, anxiety and self-harm at age 18 years: a population-based longitudinal study. Psychol Med. 2018;48(1):50–60. 10.1017/S0033291717001246 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23. Molyneaux E, Poston L, Khondoker M, et al. : Obesity, antenatal depression, diet and gestational weight gain in a population cohort study. Arch Womens Ment Health. 2016;19(5):899–907. 10.1007/s00737-016-0635-3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24. Hammerton G, Zammit S, Mahedy L, et al. : Pathways to suicide-related behavior in offspring of mothers with depression: the role of offspring psychopathology. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2015;54(5):385–93. 10.1016/j.jaac.2015.02.006 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25. Hibbeln JR, Northstone K, Evans J, et al. : Vegetarian diets and depressive symptoms among men. J Affect Disord. 2018;225:13–17. 10.1016/j.jad.2017.07.051 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26. Taylor AK, Netsi E, O’Mahen H, et al. : The association between maternal postnatal depressive symptoms and offspring sleep problems in adolescence. Psychol Med. 2017;47(3):451–459. 10.1017/S0033291716002427 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27. Savage-McGlynn E, Redshaw M, Heron J, et al. : Mechanisms of Resilience in Children of Mothers Who Self-Report with Depressive Symptoms in the First Postnatal Year. PLoS One. 2015;10(11):e0142898. 10.1371/journal.pone.0142898 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28. Pearson RM, Bornstein MH, Cordero M, et al. : Maternal perinatal mental health and offspring academic achievement at age 16: the mediating role of childhood executive function. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2016;57(4):491–501. 10.1111/jcpp.12483 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29. Evans J, Heron J, Francomb H, et al. : Cohort study of depressed mood during pregnancy and after childbirth. BMJ. 2001;323(7307):257–260. 10.1136/bmj.323.7307.257 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30. Pearson RM, Carnegie RE, Cree C, et al. : Prevalence of Prenatal Depression Symptoms Among 2 Generations of Pregnant Mothers: The Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children. JAMA Netw Open. 2018;1(3):e180725. 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2018.0725 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31. Boyd A, Golding J, Macleod J, et al. : Cohort Profile: the ’children of the 90s’--the index offspring of the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children. Int J Epidemiol. 2013;42(1):111–27. 10.1093/ije/dys064 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32. Fraser A, Macdonald-Wallis C, Tilling K, et al. : Cohort profile: the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children: ALSPAC mothers cohort. Int J Epidemiol. 2013;42(1):97–110. 10.1093/ije/dys066 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33. Northstone K, Lewcock M, Groom A, et al. : The Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC): An Update on the Enrolled Sample of Index Children in 2019. Wellcome Open Res. 2019;4:51. 10.12688/wellcomeopenres.15132.1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34. Birmingham K: Pioneering ethics in a longitudinal study. Policy Press.2018;136 10.1332/9781447340423 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 35. Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, et al. : Research electronic data capture (REDCap)--a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009;42(2):377–381. 10.1016/j.jbi.2008.08.010 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36. Harris PA, Taylor R, Minor BL, et al. : The REDCap consortium: Building an international community of software platform partners. J Biomed Inform. 2019;95:103208. 10.1016/j.jbi.2019.103208 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37. Murray L, Carothers AD: The validation of the Edinburgh Post-natal Depression Scale on a community sample. Br J Psychiatry. 1990;157:288–90. 10.1192/bjp.157.2.288 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38. Lydsdottir LB, Howard LM, Olafsdottir H, et al. : The mental health characteristics of pregnant women with depressive symptoms identified by the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale. J Clin Psychiatry. 2014;75(4):393–398. 10.4088/JCP.13m08646 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39. Howard LM, Ryan EG, Trevillion K, et al. : Accuracy of the Whooley questions and the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale in identifying depression and other mental disorders in early pregnancy. Br J Psychiatry. 2018;212(1):50–56. 10.1192/bjp.2017.9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40. Salk RH, Hyde JS, Abramson LY: Gender differences in depression in representative national samples: Meta-analyses of diagnoses and symptoms. Psychol Bull. 2017;143(8):783–822. 10.1037/bul0000102 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41. Coates R, Ayers S, de Visser R: Factor structure of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale in a population-based sample. Psychol Assess. 2017;29(8):1016–1027. 10.1037/pas0000397 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42. Zhong Q, Gelaye B, Rondon M, et al. : Comparative performance of Patient Health Questionnaire-9 and Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale for screening antepartum depression. J Affect Disord. 2014;162:1–7. 10.1016/j.jad.2014.03.028 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43. Cunningham NK, Brown PM, Page AC: Does the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale measure the same constructs across time? Arch Womens Ment Health. 2015;18(6):793–804. 10.1007/s00737-014-0485-9 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44. Hammerton G, Mahedy L, Mars B, et al. : Association between maternal depression symptoms across the first eleven years of their child’s life and subsequent offspring suicidal ideation. PLoS One. 2015;10(7):e0131885. 10.1371/journal.pone.0131885 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45. Geulayov G, Metcalfe C, Heron J, et al. : Parental suicide attempt and offspring self-harm and suicidal thoughts: results from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) birth cohort. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2014;53(5):509–17.e2. 10.1016/j.jaac.2013.12.022 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46. Gutierrez-Galve L, Stein A, Hanington L, et al. : Paternal Depression in the Postnatal Period and Child Development: Mediators and Moderators. Pediatrics. 2015;135(2):e339–47. 10.1542/peds.2014-2411 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47. Ben-Shlomo Y, Scharf JM, Miller LL, et al. : Parental mood during pregnancy and post-natally is associated with offspring risk of Tourette syndrome or chronic tics: prospective data from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC). Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2016;25(4):373–81. 10.1007/s00787-015-0742-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48. Hanington L, Ramchandani P, Stein A: Parental depression and child temperament: Assessing child to parent effects in a longitudinal population study. Infant Behav Dev. 2010;33(1):88–95. 10.1016/j.infbeh.2009.11.004 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49. Massoudi P, Hwang CP, Wickberg B: How well does the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale identify depression and anxiety in fathers? A validation study in a population based Swedish sample. J Affect Disord. 2013;149(1–3):67–74. 10.1016/j.jad.2013.01.005 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50. Martin LA, Neighbors HW, Griffith DM: The experience of symptoms of depression in men vs women: analysis of the National Comorbidity Survey Replication. JAMA Psychiatry. 2013;70(10):1100–1106. 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2013.1985 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Wellcome Open Res. 2020 Jul 27. doi: 10.21956/wellcomeopenres.17467.r39486

Reviewer response for version 1

Sarah K G Jensen 1

This is a well-written and thorough data note that will be helpful for a researcher who wishes to make use of the rich data on maternal and paternal depression within ALSPAC.

Here are a few suggestions:

  • Table 1: Consider adding the scores to the response categories.

  • Description of the population section: I would move tables 6 and 7 to the start of the section. These tables are very relevant to someone who is determining whether or not this dataset can be used to explore their hypothesis. More information about partners may be helpful. E.g., were all partners male?

  • Tables 2 and 3 are very detailed and only relevant to someone who has access to the data set. These do not have to be included here, but may instead be provided as an appendix.

  • Figure 2 and 3 are very detailed and maybe not necessary. These response patterns are to be expected and can be described briefly in the text.

  • I find the unit in Figures 4 and 5 somewhat confusing. How about the number of mothers/ partners who reported each symptom?

  • It is fine to mention that factor analysis has been conducted to explore subscales/ dimensions within the EPDS. ALSPAC given the many waves of assessment provides an excellent opportunity to explore whether these data patterns consist over time, which could be informative but possibly too much to include here.

  • When mentioning the CFA, it may also be relevant to mention Dr. Ted Barker’s work characterizing longitudinal latent classes (LLC) of maternal depression from pregnancy to 33 months (Barker, 2013 1) in ALSPAC. He identified three classes of mothers, namely low risk, medium risk, possible clinical depression (10%).

  • It may not be feasible, but it would be helpful to list all previous publications that have used EPDS in ALSPAC.

Are sufficient details of methods and materials provided to allow replication by others?

Yes

Is the rationale for creating the dataset(s) clearly described?

Yes

Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format?

Yes

Are the protocols appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Yes

Reviewer Expertise:

Effects of early psychosocial experiences (including maternal depression) on early child development

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.

References

  • 1. : The duration and timing of maternal depression as a moderator of the relationship between dependent interpersonal stress, contextual risk and early child dysregulation. Psychol Med.2013;43(8) : 10.1017/S0033291712002450 1587-96 10.1017/S0033291712002450 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Wellcome Open Res. 2020 Aug 17.
Elise Paul 1

We thank you for taking the time to review our data note. See our responses below. 

Table 1: Consider adding the scores to the response categories.

  • We are not sure what you mean here. As in, the mean scores at each time point for each of the item? If so, we believe this would provide readers with an unnecessary amount of information.

Description of the population section: I would move tables 6 and 7 to the start of the section. These tables are very relevant to someone who is determining whether or not this dataset can be used to explore their hypothesis. More information about partners may be helpful. E.g., were all partners male?

  • Tables 6 and 7 are now moved up in the section. All partners were indeed male, and this point has been clarified.

Tables 2 and 3 are very detailed and only relevant to someone who has access to the data set. These do not have to be included here but may instead be provided as an appendix.

  • We agree with this point, but unfortunately appendices are not possible with Wellcome data notes.

Figures 2 and 3 are very detailed and maybe not necessary. These response patterns are to be expected and can be described briefly in the text.

  • We have decided to keep these, as some readers may like to see visual representations of symptom patterns. 

I find the unit in Figures 4 and 5 somewhat confusing. How about the number of mothers/ partners who reported each symptom?

  • We agree that this needed clarifying. Rather than dichotomising answers, we present the mean on a 0-3 scale for each item and have clarified this in the text.

It is fine to mention that factor analysis has been conducted to explore subscales/ dimensions within the EPDS. ALSPAC given the many waves of assessment provides an excellent opportunity to explore whether these data patterns consist over time, which could be informative but possibly too much to include here. 

When mentioning the CFA, it may also be relevant to mention Dr. Ted Barker’s work characterizing longitudinal latent classes (LLC) of maternal depression from pregnancy to 33 months (Barker, 20131) in ALSPAC. He identified three classes of mothers, namely low risk, medium risk, possible clinical depression (10%).

  • We appreciate this suggestion and citation but feel it would be beyond the scope of this data note to include this.

It may not be feasible, but it would be helpful to list all previous publications that have used EPDS in ALSPAC.

  • This is an excellent idea. We have cited more previous publications and directed readers to the ALSPAC publications database.

Wellcome Open Res. 2020 Jun 1. doi: 10.21956/wellcomeopenres.17467.r38891

Reviewer response for version 1

Karen Thorpe 1

The report gives a thorough account of the ALSPAC data and provides potential users with a clear outline of the available data, potential uses, strengths and limitations.

The authors might reference the significant background work undertaken to ensure. The EPDS was suitable for use with partners and for use outside the postpartum period (citations below) 1, 2, 3, 4

There are some typographical errors - notable in the abstract. "with' should be "when". Some minor errors in the reference list.

Are sufficient details of methods and materials provided to allow replication by others?

Yes

Is the rationale for creating the dataset(s) clearly described?

Yes

Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format?

Yes

Are the protocols appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Yes

Reviewer Expertise:

Child Psychology, Developmental Science, Longitidinal research, Life course studies

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.

References

  • 1. : The effects of psychosocial factors on the mother's emotional well-being during early parenthood: A cross-cultural study of britain and greece. Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology.1992;10(4) : 10.1080/02646839208403954 205-217 10.1080/02646839208403954 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. : The effects of psychosocial factors on the emotional well-being of women during pregnancy: A cross-cultural study of britain and greece. Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology.1992;10(4) : 10.1080/02646839208403953 191-204 10.1080/02646839208403953 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. : Changes in depression during and following pregnancy. ALSPAC Study Team. Study of Pregnancy and Children. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol.1996;10(3) : 10.1111/j.1365-3016.1996.tb00051.x 279-93 10.1111/j.1365-3016.1996.tb00051.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4. : A study of the use of the Edinburgh postnatal depression scale with parent groups outside the postpartum period. Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology.1993;11(2) : 10.1080/02646839308403204 119-125 10.1080/02646839308403204 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
Wellcome Open Res. 2020 Jun 3.
Elise Paul 1

Thank you very much for taking the time to review our data note. We have taken the typographical errors into account.

Wellcome Open Res. 2020 Aug 17.
Elise Paul 1

We thank you for taking the time to review our data note. We have taken your suggestion to add more references on background work using the EPDS outside of the postpartum period. We have also fixed the typographical errors.

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Data Availability Statement

    Underlying data

    ALSPAC data are available through a system of managed open access. The application steps for ALSPAC data access are highlighted below.

    1. Please read the ALSPAC access policy which describes the process of accessing the data in detail, and outlines the costs associated with doing so.

    2. You may also find it useful to browse the fully searchable research proposals database, which lists all research projects that have been approved since April 2011.

    3. Please submit your research proposal for consideration by the ALSPAC Executive Committee. You will receive a response within 10 working days to advise you whether your proposal has been approved. If you have any questions about accessing data, please email alspac-data@bristol.ac.uk.


    Articles from Wellcome Open Research are provided here courtesy of The Wellcome Trust

    RESOURCES