Use of macrolides during pregnancy and the risk of birth defects: a population‐based study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Macrolides have been linked to the occurrence of congenital heart defects, but findings are inconsistent. We therefore aimed to estimate the risk of major congenital malformations (MCMs) after fetal exposure to macrolides, focusing on cardiac malformations. METHODS: From the Quebec Pregnancy Cohort (1998-2008), women exposed to a macrolide or penicillin in the first trimester and unexposed women were studied. There were 135 859 pregnancies included; 914 were exposed to azithromycin, 734 to erythromycin, 686 to clarithromycin, and 9106 to penicillin during the first trimester. Cases of MCMs were identified within the first year of life. RESULTS: After adjusting for potential confounders, azithromycin (RR = 1.19, 95%CI: 0.98, 1.44; 120 exposed cases), erythromycin (RR = 0.96, 95%CI: 0.74, 1.24; 66 exposed cases) and clarithromycin use (RR = 1.12, 95%CI: 0.99, 1.42; 79 exposed cases) during the first trimester of pregnancy were not statistically significantly associated with the risk of MCMs; no associations were observed for cardiac malformations. CONCLUSIONS: First trimester exposure to any of the macrolides was not associated with an increased risk of overall MCMs or cardiac malformations specifically.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it