Red blood cell folate levels in pregnant women with a history of mood disorders: A case series
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Maternal folate supplementation reduces offspring risk for neural tube defects (NTDs) and other congenital abnormalities. Maternal red blood cell (RBC) folate concentrations of >906 nmol/L have been associated with the lowest risk of having a neural tube defect affected pregnancy. Mood disorders (e.g., depression, bipolar disorder) are common among women and can be associated with folate deficiency. Thus, pregnant women with histories of mood disorders may be prone to RBC folate levels insufficient to provide optimal protection against neural tube defects. Although previous studies have assessed RBC folate concentrations in pregnant women from the general population, none have looked specifically at a group of pregnant women who have a history of a mood disorder. METHODS: We collected data about RBC folate concentrations and folic acid supplement intake during early pregnancy (<161 days gestation) from n = 24 women with histories of mood disorders. We also collected information about offspring congenital abnormalities and birth weight. RESULTS: Among women with histories of mood disorders, the mean RBC folate concentration was 674 nmol/L (range, 362-1105 nmol/L). Only 12.5% (n = 3) of the women had RBC folate concentrations >906 nmol/L, despite all participants reporting current daily use of folic acid supplements. Data regarding offspring were available for 22 women: birth weights ranged from 2296 g to 4819 g, and congenital abnormalities were identified in two (hypoplastic left heart, annular pancreas). CONCLUSION: Data from this exploratory case series suggest a need for future larger scale controlled studies investigating RBC folate concentrations in early pregnancy and offspring outcomes among women with and without histories of mood disorders.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".