The purpose of this scoping review is to identify major social determinants of health and barriers affecting access to mental health services in pregnant and postpartum women in the United States. It will also examine the scope of existing evidence-based interventions and dissemination and implementation strategies that were developed and implemented to increase accessibility to mental health treatment in high-risk pregnant and postpartum women. The Arksey and O’Malley Framework guided the review process, along with the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) recommendations for the extraction, analysis, and presentation of results in scoping reviews. Additionally, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-SCR) was used as a reference checklist. A total of 21 studies were used for analysis that were published between 2015 and 2025. An examination of social determinants of health (SDOH) influencing factors of mental health determined that those related to neighborhood and built environment had the highest rates. Using the socioecological model, individual barriers exhibited the highest frequency, with the most common themes to these barriers across all studies being language barriers, cultural barriers, and stigma-related challenges, followed by financial and childcare challenges and transportation challenges. Major findings included important evidence that therapeutic relationships with pregnant women who are depressed can be developed and that telehealth interventions improved access for women living in rural areas. Recommendations from this review will inform evidence-based interventions to address the gap in accessibility and affordability of mental health services in US pregnant and postpartum women residing in underserved communities.

Period poverty, defined as difficulty affording menstrual products, is increasingly recognized as a basic needs issue among students in the United States. However, evidence on the prevalence and awareness of this phenomenon among both undergraduate and graduate populations remains limited. Therefore, the aim of this descriptive cross-sectional study is to describe period poverty experiences and awareness levels among menstruating college students at a public university in South Florida. An online survey was administered to menstruating undergraduate and graduate students (n = 151). Period poverty was assessed using a past-year affordability question, while awareness of period poverty was measured descriptively through seven items derived from a previous study on period poverty in U.S. college students. Overall, 13.9% of respondents reported past-year period poverty. Awareness of period poverty was limited, despite high support for policies providing free menstrual products. Only 16.67% perceived period poverty to be highly prevalent in developed countries, and only 8% believed that it existed in their local area. Three fourths (75.00%) of the sample strongly supported policies to provide free menstrual products. Finally, over half of the respondents felt “not at all embarrassed” (55.07%) towards buying menstrual products, while just over one fourth reported being “fairly embarrassed” (28.26%). The discrepancy between the number of students experiencing period poverty and the levels of awareness of the issue shows a clear need for evidence-based educational interventions and menstrual resources on college campuses to improve overall menstrual well-being.