A blood test for predicting postpartum depression?

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American



On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Identifying women at risk for postpartum depression might be as easy as measuring hormone levels in the blood during pregnancy, suggests a study published today in the Archives of General Psychiatry.

"We found a hormone that is produced by the placenta during pregnancy that is a good predictor of postpartum depression," says lead author Ilona Yim, a psychologist at the University of California in Irvine. Using blood tests to measure this hormone might one day help doctors identify mothers-to-be at risk for postpartum depression (PPD).

After childbirth, many women suffer from the "baby blues"—mood swings, anxiety, sadness, and difficulty sleeping that typically clear up within 10 days. But some new moms suffer from PPD that can last for months and often requires psychotherapy and/or antidepressants.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services estimates that some 13 percent of women in the U.S. suffer from depression during pregnancy and/or in the weeks or months following childbirth; some studies put the number higher, suggesting PPD affects up to 19 percent of mothers. There are certain risk factors associated with PPD, including a history of mental illness and drug and alcohol abuse.

Yim and her colleagues followed 100 pregnant women in southern California throughout their pregnancies and for approximately nine weeks after their babies were born.

The researchers at five intervals (15, 19, 25, 31 and 37 weeks) tested their subjects' blood levels of placental corticotropin-releasing hormone (pCRH), a hormone that normally climbs during pregnancy to prepare the body for birth and that they suspected might be linked to PPD.

About nine weeks after each woman delivered, the scientists asked each one to complete a survey on whether she had any PPD symptoms. The researchers discovered that the women who developed PPD all had a surge of pCRH on or around their 25th week of pregnancy; 75 percent of the 16 women identified with the condition had more than 56.86 picograms per milliliter of pCRH in their blood compared with only 24 percent of those who did not develop PPD.

Yim says she's optimistic that further research may confirm her findings and that pCRH may one day be used to predict postpartum depression.

©iStockphoto.com/daftbird

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe