We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Implementation science offers a compelling value proposition to translational science. As such, many translational science stakeholders are seeking to recruit, teach, and train an implementation science workforce. The type of workforce that will make implementation happen consists of both implementation researchers and practitioners, yet little guidance exists on how to train such a workforce. We—members of the Advancing Dissemination and Implementation Sciences in CTSAs Working Group—present the Teaching For Implementation Framework to address this gap. We describe the differences between implementation researchers and practitioners and demonstrate what and how to teach them individually and in co-learning opportunities. We briefly comment on educational infrastructures and resources that will be helpful in furthering this type of approach.
Postnatal depression follows 10% of live births but there is little consensus on the risk factors associated with its development. Previous smaller studies have been unable to quantify the impact of independent risk factors as relative and attributable risks.
Method
The Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) was used to screen a systematic sample of 2375 women, six to eight weeks after delivery. Information on socio-demographic and obstetric variables was collected at the screening interview. The risk factors associated with high EPDS scores (>12) were determined and entered stepwise into a regression model.
Results
Four independent variables were found to be associated with an EPDS score above this threshold. These were an unplanned pregnancy (OR 1.44); not breast-feeding (OR 1.52), and unemployment in either the mother, i.e. no job to return to following maternity leave (OR 1.56), or the head of household (OR 1.50). These four variables appeared to explain the risk associated with other risk factors.
Conclusions
Although a direct aetiological role for these risk factors is not certain, they may indicate strategies for the prevention of affective morbidity in postnatal women. These may include reducing unwanted pregnancy and employment for women after childbirth.