Screening for postpartum depression with the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS): An ethical analysis

Author:

Krantz Ingela1,Eriksson Bo2,Lundquist-Persson Cristina3,Ahlberg Beth Maina4,Nilstun Tore5

Affiliation:

1. Department of Medical Ethics, Lund University, Sweden, Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Epidemiology, Umeå University, Sweden, Skaraborg Institute for Research and Development, Skövde, Sweden,

2. Nordic School of Public Health, Gothenburg, Sweden

3. Skaraborg Institute for Research and Development, Skövde, Sweden, Department of Psychology, Lund University, Sweden

4. Skaraborg Institute for Research and Development, Skövde, Sweden, Department of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University, Sweden

5. Department of Medical Ethics, Lund University, Sweden

Abstract

Aims: To assess the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS), a self-administered questionnaire created to screen for symptoms of postpartum depression in the community, from an epidemiological and ethical perspective. Screening, as the practice of investigating apparently healthy individuals to detect unrecognised disease or its precursors, has interpretation problems and is complicated by deliberations on probabilities for something to occur, on which the scientific community is unanimous. Methods: Our ethical analysis is made using a framework with two different dimensions, the ethical principles autonomy and beneficence and the affected persons. To balance the ethical costs and the ethical benefits of EPDS an analogy with the assessment of pharmaceutics is used. Results: In this article we argue that routine EPDS screening of Swedish postpartum women would lead to considerable ethical problems due to the weak scientific foundation of the screening instrument. Despite a multitude of published studies, the side-effects in terms of misclassifications have not been considered carefully. The EPDS does not function very well as a routine screening instrument. The dualism created is too reductive and fails to recognize the plurality of difference that exists in the social word. Conclusions: Public health authorities should not advocate screening of unproved value. Screening is not just a medical issue but also an ethical one.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,General Medicine

Cited by 20 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3