The purpose of this study is to assess the feasibility, acceptability and preliminary effectiveness of "What Were We Thinking" (WWWT) a psychoeducational intervention -delivered remotely via communication technologies- to prevent symptoms of postpartum depression and anxiety in new mothers; which has been shown to be effective in primary health settings. WWWT was developed in Australia and has been culturally adapted to be used in Chile. The m-health version of the Chilean adaptation of WWWT for the current study includes: Psychoeducational modules on issues relevant to mothers during the post-partum period; contact with the program facilitator through instant messaging services available on mobile phones and a virtual group meeting. This pilot study will use a mixed design. The quantitative component will consist of a before-after design with control group including 90 adult mothers of child aged 6-8 weeks who receive health care in a primary health centers in Santiago, Chile. Mothers will be randomized into the experimental (EG) or control groups (CG) in a rate of 1:1. Both EG and CG will receive usual treatment provided by primary health centers (TAU), and only de EG will receive the m-health adapted version of the WWWT. The qualitative component considers 12 users semi-structured interviews. The maximum variation sampling strategy will be used according to the completion of m-health version of WWWT. An open coding of Grounded Theory will be used to data analysis. The feasibility of m-health version of WWWT intervention will be evaluated in terms of eligibility rates, recruitment rates and reasons for study refusals, feasibility to deliver the three components of the intervention, data attrition and follow-up rates by treatment condition. Their acceptability considers participant completion of the intervention rates, and a qualitative assessment of the users' acceptability of and satisfaction. Secondary outcomes will include changes on maternal levels of depressive and anxiety symptoms, maternal self-efficacy and perceived social support. And differences in mother-infant quality of interaction between intervention and control groups.
Age range
18 Years – 64 Years
Sex
FEMALE
See this in plain English?
AI-rewrites the medical criteria so a patient or caregiver can understand them. Always confirm with the trial site.
Bring these to your next appointment. They're a starting point for a shared conversation — not a sign you qualify or a recommendation to enrol.
Generated to help you prepare — always confirm anything about your own eligibility and care with the study team and your doctor.
The trial coordinator is the person who runs the study day to day. These cover the practical side — logistics, costs, and what taking part would actually mean for your life. The study team confirms whether you meet the criteria; these are questions to ask, not a sign you qualify.
A starting point for the conversation — always confirm anything about your own eligibility, costs, and care with the study team and your doctor.
Eligibility rate as feasibility indicator
Timeframe: At the baseline assessment during the recruitment period.
Recruitment rate as feasibility indicator
Timeframe: At the baseline assessment during the recruitment period.
Percentage of EG participants who receive the 12 psychoeducational modules, who attend the virtual meeting and who -at least- once established contact with the program facilitator
Timeframe: At 4-weeks from beginning intervention (when intervention finished)
Percentage of participants who finished intervention by group as acceptability indicator
Timeframe: At 4-weeks from beginning intervention (when intervention finished).
Percentage of participant retention at follow-up by group as acceptability indicator
Timeframe: At 12-weeks after the completion of the intervention (follow-up measurement).