Table 3 Determinants of clinically-significant symptoms of antenatal CMDs among women who experienced an earthquake recently

 Wounded themselves

Relative Risk, 1.28 (95% CI, 0.51; 3.23, p = 0.61) [18]

n = 171; Covariates: none [18]

 Wounded relatives

With EPDS total score (adjusted regression coefficient 0.221, p = 0.002) [19]

n = 128; Covariates: number of children, subjective support, negative coping styles and positive coping styles [19]

 Dead relatives

Mean EPDS score: yes (21.67 ± 2.51); no (11.00 ± 5.53 (p = 0.001) [19]

n = 128; Covariates: none [19]

Relative Risk, 3.42 (95% CI, 2.71; 4.32, p = 0.003) [18]

n = 171; Covariates: none [18]

 Starvation during pregnancy

Relative Risk, 2.34 (95% CI, 1.59; 3.44, p < 0.001) [18]

n = 171; Covariates: none [18]

 The intensity of an earthquake ((less than 6 upper/6 upper seismic intensity on Japanese scale)

Correlation ratio with EPDS total score (ɳ=0.16, p < 0.01) [13]

n^a; Covariates: none [13]

 Composite earthquake experiences (12-item scale)

≥2 IES-R score: (aOR, 1.80, 95% CI, 1.43; 2.26; p < 0.001) [15]

n = 311; Covariates: age, education and stresses of pregnancy [15]

 Displacement due to earthquake

Relative Risk, 1.01 (95% CI, 0.73; 1.42, p = 0.93) [18]

n = 171; Covariates: none [18]

 House damage

Correlation ratio with EPDS total score (ɳ=0.04, p > 0.05) [13]

n^a; Covariates: none [13]

 Evacuation

Correlation ratio with EPDS total score (ɳ=0.08, > 0.05) [13]

n^a; Covariates: none [13]

 Subjective support

With EPDS total score (adjusted regression coefficient = − 0.249, p = 0.001) [19]

n = 128; Covariates: number of children, wounded relatives, negative coping styles and positive coping styles [19]

 Objective support

Correlation coefficient with EPDS total score (r = − 0.324; p = 0.01) [19]

n = 128; Covariates: none [19]

 Support use

Correlation coefficient with EPDS total score (r = − 0.320; p = 0.01) [19]

n = 128; Covariates: none [19]

 Perceived availability of functional social support

≥14 EPDS score: Poor social support (aOR, 3.07, 95% CI, 1.21; 7.78, p < 0.05 [17]

n = 578; Covariates: age, education, duration of living in a study setting, employment status of respondents, a main financial supporter of the family, types of residence, number of babies and marital conflict [17]

 Support from parents

≥10 EPDS score: compared to higher support, lower (aOR, 0.56, 95% CI, 0.06; 5.13, p = 0.603), medium (aOR, 1.34, 95% CI, 0.49; 3.67, p = 0.564) [16]

n = 520; Covariates: age, education, monthly family income, residence, employment, maternal BMI, pregnancy intention, gestational age, parity, sleep quality, smoking, alcohol history, husband is migrant worker, social support from husband, parents-in-law, stresses of pregnancy, marital satisfaction, thoughts and feelings regarding the marriage and one’s spouse, agreement on relationship matters and life satisfaction [16]

 Support from parents-in-law

≥10 EPDS score: compared to higher support, lower (aOR, 0.74, 95% CI, 0.24; 2.23, p = 0.588), medium (aOR, 0.51, 95% CI, 0.24; 1.08, p = 0.076) [16]

n = 520; Covariates: age, education, monthly family income, residence, employment, maternal BMI, pregnancy intention, gestational age, parity, sleep quality, smoking, alcohol history, husband is migrant worker, social support from husband, parents, stresses of pregnancy, marital satisfaction, thoughts and feelings regarding the marriage and one’s spouse, agreement on relationship matters and life satisfaction [16]

 Age

≥ 14 EPDS score: compared to > 25 years, ≤25 years (aOR, 1.79; 95% CI, 0.84; 3.85; p > 0.05) [17]

n = 578; Covariates: education, duration of living in the study setting, employment status of respondents, a main financial supporter of the family, types of residence, number of babies, marital conflict and social support [17]

≥2 IES-R score: compared to ≥30 years, younger age (18–24 years) (aOR, 0.10, 95% CI, 0.03; 0.31, p < 0.001), aged 25 to 29 years (aOR, 0.35, 95% CI, 0.09; 1.34, p = 0.125) [15]

n = 311; Covariates: education, stress of pregnancy and earthquake experiences [15]

≥10 EPDS score: compared to ≥30 years, younger age (18–24 years) (aOR, 0.42, 95% CI, 0.20; 0.90, p = 0.025), aged 25 to 29 years (aOR, 0.56, 95% CI, 0.22; 1.39, p = 0.210) [15]

n = 311; Covariates: education, pregnancy intention, sleep quality, family relationship and stresses of pregnancy [15]

≥10 EPDS score: compared to ≥30 years, younger age (18–24 years) (aOR, 0.96, 95% CI, 0.41; 2.27, p = 0.927), aged 25–29 years (aOR, 0.60, 95% CI, 0.25; 1.43, p = 0.246) [16]

n = 520; Covariates: education, monthly family income, residence, employment, maternal BMI, pregnancy intention, gestational age, parity, sleep quality, smoking, alcohol history, husband is migrant worker, social support from husband, parents, parents-in-law, stresses of pregnancy, marital satisfaction, thoughts and feelings regarding the marriage and one’s spouse, agreement on relationship matters and life satisfaction [16]

Correlation coefficient with EPDS total score (r = − 0.014, p > 0.05) [19]

n = 128; Covariates: none [19]

> 3 CHQ score: 28.04 ± 5.5, < 3 CHQ score: 27.16 ± 4.7, p = 0.32 [18]

n = 171; Covariates: none [18]

Correlation coefficient with EPDS total score (r = − 0.12, p > 0.05) [13]

n^a; Covariates: none [13]

 Maternal body weight (kg)

> 3 CHQ score: 54.15 ± 8.7, < 3 CHQ score: 53.67 ± 8.7, p = 0.23 [18]

n = 171; Covariates: none [18]

 Maternal height (cm)

> 3 CHQ score: 158.1 ± 4.9, < 3 CHQ score: 157.6 ± 5.3, p = 0.25 [18]

n = 171; Covariates: none [18]

 Maternal body mass index (BMI)

≥10 EPDS score: < 23/≥23 (aOR, 1.89, 95% CI, 0.99; 3.64, p = 0.056) [16]

n = 520; Covariates: age, education, monthly family income, residence, employment, pregnancy intention, gestational age, parity, sleep quality, smoking, alcohol history, husband is migrant worker, social support from husband, parents, parents-in-law, stresses of pregnancy, marital satisfaction, thoughts and feelings regarding the marriage and one’s spouse, agreement on relationship matters and life satisfaction [16]

 Education

≥14 EPDS score: compared to Tertiary, ≤secondary (aOR, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.58; 5.79; p > 0.05) [17]

n = 578; Covariates: age, duration of living in the study setting, employment status of respondents, a main financial supporter of the family, types of residence, number of babies, marital conflict and social support [17]

≥2 IES-R score: compared to college or above, middle or lower education (aOR, 1.52, 95% CI, 0.23; 9.92, p = 0.660); high school (aOR, 0.27, 95% CI, 0.03; 2.11, p = 0.210) [15]

n = 311; Covariates: age, stresses of pregnancy and earthquake experiences [15]

≥10 EPDS score: compared to college or above, middle or lower education (aOR, 0.56, 95% CI, 0.24; 1.32,p = 0.186); high school (aOR, 1.29, 95% CI, 0.55; 3.02, p = 0.565) [16]

n = 520; Covariates: age, monthly family income, residence, employment, maternal BMI, pregnancy intention, gestational age, parity, sleep quality, smoking, alcohol history, husband is migrant worker, social support from husband, parents, parents-in-law, stresses of pregnancy, marital satisfaction, thoughts and feelings regarding the marriage and one’s spouse, agreement on relationship matters and life satisfaction [16]

EPDS scores of ≤ primary school (13.29 ± 5.53), high school (11.86 ± 5.76), junior college (10.21 ± 5.89), ≥ bachelor’s degree (8.93 ± 4.46) (p = 0.105) [19]

n = 128; Covariates: none [19]

 Occupation

EPDS scores of farmers (13.07 ± 5.93), others (9.65 ± 5.03) (p = 0.001) [19]

n = 128; Covariates: none [19]

 Employment

≥14 EPDS score: compared to full-time employed, part-time/unemployment (aOR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.46; 2.17; p > 0.05) [17]

n = 578; Covariates: age, education, duration of living in a study setting, a main financial supporter of the family, types of residence, number of babies, marital conflict and social support [17]

≥10 EPDS score: compared to full-time job, unemployed (aOR, 0.54, 95% CI, 0.21; 1.39, p = 0.201), part-time job (aOR, 2.97, 95% CI, 0.58; 13.85, p = 196) [16]

n = 520; Covariates: age, education, monthly family income, residence, maternal BMI, pregnancy intention, gestational age, parity, sleep quality, smoking, alcohol history, husband is migrant worker, social support from husband, parents, parents-in-law, stresses of pregnancy, marital satisfaction, thoughts and feelings regarding the marriage and one’s spouse, agreement on relationship matters and life satisfaction [16]

 Partner’s employment status

≥14 EPDS score: compared to full-time employed, part-time/unemployment (OR, 1.40, 95% CI, 0.31; 6.22, p > 0.05) [17]

n = 578; Covariates: none [17]

 Monthly individual total income

≥14 EPDS score: compared to >RMB $2000, ≤RMB $2000 (OR, 1.52, 95% CI, 0.78; 2.94, p > 0.05) [17]

n = 578; Covariates: none [17]

 Monthly family income

≥10 EPDS score: compared to ≥802 USD, < 160 USD (aOR, 0.98, 95% CI, 0.31; 3.04, p = 0.965), 160–320 USD (aOR, 1.72, 95% CI, 0.76; 3.89, p = 0.194), 321–801 USD (aOR, 0.80, 95% CI, 0.39; 1.64, p = 0.540) [16]

n = 520; Covariates: age, education, residence, employment, maternal BMI, pregnancy intention, gestational age, parity, sleep quality, smoking, alcohol history, husband is migrant worker, social support from husband, parents, parents-in-law, stresses of pregnancy, marital satisfaction, thoughts and feelings regarding the marriage and one’s spouse, agreement on relationship matters and life satisfaction [16]

EPDS score of < 5000 (12.26 ± 5.99), 5000 to 9999 (13.0 ± 7.05), 10,000 to 19,999 (9.29 ± 4.98), 20,000 to 49,999 (10.00 ± 3.91), ≥50,000 (9.18 ± 4.42) (p = 0.80) [19]

n = 128; Covariates: none [19]

 Main finance supporter in the family

≥14 EPDS score: compared to couple sharing, one partner only (aOR, 2.19, 95% CI, 1.00; 4.80, p > 0.05) [17]

n = 578; Covariates: age, education, duration of living in a study setting, employment status of respondents, types of residence, number of babies, marital conflict and social support [17]

 Type of residence

≥14 EPDS score: compared to private house, in public house (aOR, 1.20, 95% CI, 0.56; 2.57, p > 0.05) [17]

n = 578; Covariates: age, education, duration of living in a study setting, employment status of respondents, a main financial supporter of the family, number of babies, marital conflict and social support [17]

≥10 EPDS score: Village/City (aOR, 1.57, 95% CI, 0.69; 3.59, p = 0.285) [16]

n = 520; Covariates: age, education, monthly family income, employment, maternal BMI, pregnancy intention, gestational age, parity, sleep quality, smoking, alcohol history, husband is migrant worker, social support from husband, parents, parents-in-law, stresses of pregnancy, marital satisfaction, thoughts and feelings regarding the marriage and one’s spouse, agreement on relationship matters and life satisfaction [16]

 Duration of stay in the study area

≥14 EPDS score: compared to > 1 year, < 1 year (aOR, 3.58; 95% CI, 1.16; 11.01, p < 0.05) [17]

n = 578; Covariates: age, education, employment status of respondents, a main financial supporter of the family, types of residence, number of babies, marital conflict and social support [17]

 Sleep quality

≥10 EPDS score: compared to very good, poor (aOR, 1.47, 95% CI, 0.48; 4.54, p = 0.504); fair (aOR, 1.57, 95% CI, 0.78; 3.16, p = 0.203); good (aOR, 0.74, 95% CI, 0.33; 1.62, p = 0.445) [15]

n = 311; Covariates: age, education, pregnancy intention, family relationship and stresses of pregnancy [15]

≥10 EPDS score: compared to good, poor (aOR, 2.38, 95% CI, 0.95; 5.99, p = 0.64), fair (aOR, 1.58, 95% CI, 0.89; 2.81, p = 0.20) [16]

n = 520; Covariates: age, education, monthly family income, residence, employment, maternal BMI, pregnancy intention, gestational age, parity, smoking, alcohol history, husband is migrant worker, social support from husband, parents, parents-in-law, stresses of pregnancy, marital satisfaction, thoughts and feelings regarding the marriage and one’s spouse, agreement on relationship matters and life satisfaction [16]

 Smoking history

≥10 EPDS score: no/yes (aOR, 0.54, 95% CI, 0.07; 4.33, p = 0.560) [16]

n = 520; Covariates: age, education, monthly family income, residence, employment, maternal BMI, pregnancy intention, gestational age, parity, sleep quality, alcohol history, husband is migrant worker, social support from husband, parents, parents-in-law, stresses of pregnancy, marital satisfaction, thoughts and feelings regarding the marriage and one’s spouse, agreement on relationship matters and life satisfaction [16]

 Alcohol use history

≥10 EPDS score: no/yes (aOR, 1.35, 95% CI, 0.42; 4.31, p = 0.615) [16]

n = 520; Covariates: age, education, monthly family income, residence, employment, maternal BMI, pregnancy intention, gestational age, parity, sleep quality, smoking history, husband is migrant worker, social support from husband, parents, parents-in-law, stresses of pregnancy, marital satisfaction, thoughts and feelings regarding the marriage and one’s spouse, agreement on relationship matters and life satisfaction [16]

 Length of marriage

≥14 EPDS score: compared to > 1 year, < 1 year (OR, 1.44, 95% CI, 0.72; 2.86, p > 0.05) [17]

N = 578; Covariates: none [17]

 Husband is a migrant worker

≥10 EPDS score: no/yes (aOR, 1.08, 95% CI, 0.64; 1.83, p = 0.781) [16]

n = 520; Covariates: age, education, monthly family income, residence, employment, maternal BMI, pregnancy intention, gestational age, parity, sleep quality, smoking, alcohol history, social support from husband, parents, parents-in-law, stresses of pregnancy, marital satisfaction, thoughts and feelings regarding the marriage and one’s spouse, agreement on relationship matters and life satisfaction [16]

 Marital satisfaction

≥10 EPDS score: with total score (aOR, 0.97, 95% CI, 0.90; 1.05, p = 0.434) [16]

n = 520; Covariates: age, education, monthly family income, residence, employment, maternal BMI, pregnancy intention, gestational age, parity, sleep quality, smoking, alcohol history, husband is migrant worker, social support from husband, parents, parents-in-law, stresses of pregnancy, thoughts and feelings regarding the marriage and one’s spouse, agreement on relationship matters and life satisfaction [16]

  ‘Thoughts and feelings regarding the marriage and one’s spouse’

≥10 EPDS score: with total score (aOR, 0.99, 95% CI, 0.97; 1.02, p = 0.776) [16]

n = 520; Covariates: age, education, monthly family income, residence, employment, maternal BMI, pregnancy intention, gestational age, parity, sleep quality, smoking, alcohol history, husband is migrant worker, social support from husband, parents, parents-in-law, stresses of pregnancy, marital satisfaction, agreement on relationship matters and life satisfaction [16]

  ‘Agreement on relationship matters’

≥10 EPDS score: with total score (aOR, 0.99, 95% CI, 0.96; 1.02, p = 0.401) [16]

n = 520; Covariates: age, education, monthly family income, residence, employment, maternal BMI, pregnancy intention, gestational age, parity, sleep quality, smoking, alcohol history, husband is migrant worker, social support from husband, parents, parents-in-law, stresses of pregnancy, marital satisfaction, thoughts and feelings regarding the marriage and one’s spouse and life satisfaction [16]

 Quality of marital and family relationship

≥10 EPDS score: with total score (aOR, 0.84, 95% CI, 0.73; 0.98, p = 0.022) [15]

n = 311; Covariates: age, education, pregnancy intention, sleep quality and stresses of pregnancy [15]

 Marital conflict ((The Dyadic Adjustment Scale Total Score)

≥14 EPDS score: higher conflict (aOR, 3.60, 95% CI, 1.76; 7.20, p < 0.01) [17]

n = 578; Covariates: age, education, duration of living in a study setting, employment status of respondents, a main financial supporter of the family, types of residence, number of babies and social support [17]

 Support from husband

≥10 EPDS score: compared higher support, lower (aOR, 1.75, 95% CI, 0.16; 19.28, p = 0.646) medium (aOR, 3.57, 95% CI, 1.36; 9.38, p = 0.010) [16]

n = 520; Covariates: age, education, monthly family income, residence, employment, maternal BMI, pregnancy intention, gestational age, parity, sleep quality, smoking, alcohol history, husband is migrant worker, social support from parents, parents-in-law, stresses of pregnancy, marital satisfaction, thoughts and feelings regarding the marriage and one’s spouse, agreement on relationship matters and life satisfaction [16]

 Gestational age

≥10 EPDS score: < 12 weeks = 8 (47.1%); 13–28 weeks = 38 (31.7%); > 28 weeks = 78 (47.3%) (p = 0.025) [15]

n = 311; Covariates: none [15]

≥10 EPDS score: 13–28 weeks/> 28 weeks (aOR, 1.06, 95% CI, 0.56; 2.01, p = 0.857) [16]

n = 520; Covariates: age, education, monthly family income, residence, employment, maternal BMI, pregnancy intention, parity, sleep quality, smoking, alcohol history, husband is migrant worker, social support from husband, parents, parents-in-law, stresses of pregnancy, marital satisfaction, thoughts and feelings regarding the marriage and one’s spouse, agreement on relationship matters and life satisfaction [16]

Correlation coefficient with EPDS total score (r = 0.181, p < 0.05) [19]

Mean EPDS score of > 28 weeks (11.75 ± 5.52); < 28 weeks (8.96 ± 6.14) (p = 0.033) [19]

n = 128; Covariates: none [19]

Correlation ratio with EPDS total score (ɳ=0.21, p = < 0.05) [13]

n^a; Covariates: none [13]

 Pregnancy intention

≥14 EPDS score: compared to planned, unplanned (OR, 1.63, 95% CI, 0.80; 3.29, p > 0.05) [17]

n = 578; Covariates: none [17]

≥10 EPDS score: compared to planned pregnancy, unplanned (aOR, 1.65, 95% CI, 0.96; 2.85, p = 0.070) [15]

n = 311; Covariates: age, education, sleep quality, family relationship and stresses of pregnancy [15]

≥10 EPDS score: planned/unplanned (aOR, 0.92, 95% CI, 0.54; 1.55, p = 0.743) [16]

n = 520; Covariates: age, education, monthly family income, residence, employment, maternal BMI, gestational age, parity, sleep quality, smoking, alcohol history, husband is migrant worker, social support from husband, parents, parents-in-law, stresses of pregnancy, marital satisfaction, thoughts and feelings regarding the marriage and one’s spouse, agreement on relationship matters and life satisfaction [16]

 Parity/number of children

≥14 EPDS score: compared to nulliparous, multiparous (aOR, 2.47, 95% CI, 1.18; 5.17; p < 0.05) [17]

n = 578; Covariates: age, education, duration of living in a study setting, employment status of respondents, a main financial supporter of the family, types of residence, marital conflict and social support [17]

≥2 IES-R score: Primi gravida = 5(3.9%); others = 33 (18.0%) (p < 0.001) [15]

n = 311; Covariates: none [15]

≥10 EPDS score: Primipara/Others (aOR, 0.54, 95% CI, 0.29; 1.01, p = 0.055) [16]

n = 520; Covariates: age, education, monthly family income, residence, employment, maternal BMI, pregnancy intention, gestational age, sleep quality, smoking, alcohol history, husband is migrant worker, social support from husband, parents, parents-in-law, stresses of pregnancy, marital satisfaction, thoughts and feelings regarding the marriage and one’s spouse, agreement on relationship matters and life satisfaction [16]

with EPDS total score: number of children (adjusted regression coefficient = 0.262, p < 0.001) [19]

n = 128; Covariates: wounded relatives, subjective support and negative coping styles [19]

Gravida > 3 CHQ score: 2.30 ± 0.95, < 3 CHQ score: 2.11 ± 1.10, p = 0.46 [18]

Parity > 3 CHQ score: 0.97 ± 0.79, < 3 CHQ score: 0.93 ± 0.97, p = 0.53 [18]

n = 171; Covariates: none [18]

Correlation ratio with EPDS total score: parity (ɳ=0.40, p < 0.01) [13]

n^a; Covariates: none [13]

 Perceived pressure of pregnancy

≥2 IES-R score: total score of stress scale (aOR, 1.19, 95% CI, 1.07; 1.32; p = 0.001) [15]

n = 311; Covariates: age, education earthquake experiences [15]

≥10 EPDS score: total score of stress scale (aOR, 1.19, 95% CI, 1.12; 1.27; p < 0.001) [15]

n = 311; Covariates: age, education, pregnancy intention, sleep quality and family relationship [15]

≥10 EPDS score: total score of stress scale (aOR, 4.55, 95% CI, 2.36; 8.77, p < 0.001) [16]

n = 520; Covariates: age, education, monthly family income, residence, employment, maternal BMI, pregnancy intention, gestational age, parity, sleep quality, smoking, alcohol history, husband is migrant worker, social support from husband, parents, parents-in-law, marital satisfaction, thoughts and feelings regarding the marriage and one’s spouse, agreement on relationship matters and life satisfaction [16]

 Positive coping

With EPDS total score: (adjusted regression coefficient = − 0.193, p = 0.006) [19]

n = 128; Covariates: number of children, wounded relatives, subjective support and negative coping styles [19]

 Negative coping

With EPDS total score: (adjusted regression coefficient = 0.276, p < 0.001) [19]

n = 128; Covariates: number of children, wounded relatives, subjective support and positive coping styles [19]

 Life satisfaction

≥10 EPDS score: with total score (aOR, 0.97, 95% CI, 0.93; 1.02, p = 0.267) [16]

n = 520; Covariates: age, education, monthly family income, residence, employment, maternal BMI, pregnancy intention, gestational age, parity, sleep quality, smoking, alcohol history, husband is migrant worker, social support from husband, parents, parents-in-law, stresses of pregnancy, marital satisfaction, thoughts and feelings regarding the marriage and one’s spouse and agreement on relationship matters [16]

  ‘Negative attitude to the influence of earthquake on pregnancy’

Relative Risk, 1.28 (95% CI, 0.89; 1.85, p = 0.19) [18]

n = 171; Covariates: none [18]

  ‘Existing anxiety about an earthquake’

Correlation ratio with EPDS total score (ɳ=0.50, p < 0.01) [13]

n^a; Covariates: none [13]

 Subjective feelings regarding the earthquake

Correlation ratio with EPDS total score (ɳ=0.03, p > 0.05) [13]

n^a; Covariates: none [13]

 Sense of Coherence (SOC) total score

Correlation coefficient with EPDS total score (r = 0.21, p > 0.05) [13]

n^a; Covariates: none [13]