The intervention group consists of pregnant women in the second trimester who were registered with two family health centers.The Gpower 3.1.9.2. program was used to determine the number of participants in both groups. The sample size was found as 25 for each group by accepting the effect size to be wide (0.82), the alpha value (0.05), and the power (0.80). In the experimental group, sampling adequacy for within comparisons was evaluated with Gpower 3.1.9.2. program. It was determined that the sample was sufficient for partial eta squared values obtained from the study. (10 participants were adequate for each group).The researcher (SK) obtained the list of registered women with a pregnancy between 16-24 gestational weeks. Based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, the participants were included in the intervention group via face-to-face interviews. Informed written consent was obtained from each participant, and the interventions were performed in this group. Mothers receiving standard antenatal care in the prenatal period, giving birth, and having a three-month-old baby constituted the control group. The control group was created after the procedures were completed for those in the intervention group.

Interventions such as music listening, laughter therapy, and diary keeping were carried out for each woman in the intervention group.A six-session antenatal care program included both music listening and laughter therapy and was designed for those in the study group as a session every week. The program was carried out by arranging a music session for one week and a laughter therapy session over the following week. Also, the notes uttered by pregnant women were discussed at the week laughter listening sessions were performed. Data from the intervention group were collected four times as pretest (after providing informed contest), first-interval measurement (fourth week of the intervention), second-interval measurement (the first month following the birth), and post-test (the third month following the delivery). Even so, the post-test was administered only for the controls.

The data pooled after the study were analyzed using the computer software of SPSS 22.0, OpenMeta\[Analyst\], and JAPS 09.0 statistical analysis packages. The findings were tested at p\<0.05 of the significance level.Similarity analyses of the study and control groups were performed with chi-square (the Pearson and Yates correction). The post-test scores of BDI, EPDS, BSI, and MAS in the intervention and control groups were compared through the t test in independent groups, and Cohen's d and confidence interval (CI) was utilized in the assessment of effect size. Four measurement results of the intervention group were compared with those of variance analysis through repeated measurements, and the partial eta square and CI were used to evaluate the effect size. Two-way variance analysis for repeated measurements was used in evaluating the group/time interactions of the changes in terms of the overall mental health scores of the group with and without depression symptoms in the intervention group at the four time-point.In Cohen's d calculation, if d is 0.20, 0.50, and 0.80, the calculation demonstrates small, medium, and large effect sizes, respectively (d≤ 0.20 weak, d\<0.50 medium and d≥ 0.80 large effect size). However, in evaluating the partial eta square, 0.01, 0.06, and 0.14 were considered small, medium, and large, respectively.