MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1930136637 · doi:10.1136/bmj.h3190

Specific SSRIs and birth defects: bayesian analysis to interpret new data in the context of previous reports

2015· review· en· W1930136637 on OpenAlexaff
Jennita Reefhuis, Owen Devine, Jan M. Friedman, Carol Louik, Margaret A. Honein

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCenters for Disease Control and Prevention
KeywordsSertralineMedicineOdds ratioObstetricsContext (archaeology)OmphalocelePregnancyParoxetineEscitalopramPediatricsPopulationFluoxetineInternal medicineFetusAntidepressantBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To follow up on previously reported associations between periconceptional use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and specific birth defects using an expanded dataset from the National Birth Defects Prevention Study. DESIGN: Bayesian analysis combining results from independent published analyses with data from a multicenter population based case-control study of birth defects. SETTING: 10 centers in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: 17,952 mothers of infants with birth defects and 9857 mothers of infants without birth defects, identified through birth certificates or birth hospitals, with estimated dates of delivery between 1997 and 2009. EXPOSURES: Citalopram, escitalopram, fluoxetine, paroxetine, or sertraline use in the month before through the third month of pregnancy. Posterior odds ratio estimates were adjusted to account for maternal race/ethnicity, education, smoking, and prepregnancy obesity. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: 14 birth defects categories that had associations with SSRIs reported in the literature. RESULTS: Sertraline was the most commonly reported SSRI, but none of the five previously reported birth defects associations with sertraline was confirmed. For nine previously reported associations between maternal SSRI use and birth defect in infants, findings were consistent with no association. High posterior odds ratios excluding the null value were observed for five birth defects with paroxetine (anencephaly 3.2, 95% credible interval 1.6 to 6.2; atrial septal defects 1.8, 1.1 to 3.0; right ventricular outflow tract obstruction defects 2.4, 1.4 to 3.9; gastroschisis 2.5, 1.2 to 4.8; and omphalocele 3.5, 1.3 to 8.0) and for two defects with fluoxetine (right ventricular outflow tract obstruction defects 2.0, 1.4 to 3.1 and craniosynostosis 1.9, 1.1 to 3.0). CONCLUSIONS: These data provide reassuring evidence for some SSRIs but suggest that some birth defects occur 2-3.5 times more frequently among the infants of women treated with paroxetine or fluoxetine early in pregnancy.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.914
Threshold uncertainty score0.627

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.096
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.315 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations160
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJSame topicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and PostpartumFrench-language works237,207