Comparing the Pharmacokinetics of Doxylamine/Pyridoxine Delayed‐Release Combination in Nonpregnant Women of Reproductive Age and Women in the First Trimester of Pregnancy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although Diclectin (doxylamine/pyridoxine delayed-released combination) is widely used in Canada, its pharmacokinetics (PK) during pregnancy has never been described. The objective of this study was to compare the PK of doxylamine/pyridoxine delayed-released combination in pregnant versus nonpregnant women. The apparent clearances (CL) of doxylamine and pyridoxal 5'-phosphate (PLP; the active metabolite of vitamin B(6) ) during the first-trimester pregnancy in women who participated in a Diclectin randomized trial were compared with those of healthy, adult, nonpregnant women who participated in a voluntary PK trial. Eighteen nonpregnant women were compared with 50 pregnant women who were treated with Diclectin. There was no difference in the apparent CL of doxylamine in women in their first trimester of pregnancy when compared with nonpregnant women on day 4 (median = 196.7 vs 249.5 mL/h/kg, respectively, P = .065), day 8 (median = 248.4 vs 249.5 mL/h/kg, respectively, P = .82), and day 15 (median = 200.9 vs 249.5 mL/h/kg, respectively, P = .55). No difference was found in the apparent CL of PLP on day 15 (median = 342.3 vs 314.7 mL/h/kg, respectively, P = .92). There was no pregnancy-induced effect in the apparent CL of either doxylamine or PLP in women during the first trimester of pregnancy despite the existence of morning sickness.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".