Pregnancy outcomes in women using inhaled fluticasone during pregnancy: a case series
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to report the maternal and fetal outcomes of women with respiratory illnesses who were treated with inhaled fluticasone during pregnancy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We identified 12 cases treated with inhaled fluticasone during pregnancy out of women who received obstetric and teratogen-risk evaluation at the Korean Motherisk Program. A detailed medical and obstetric history was obtained and cases were followed-up until either spontaneous or voluntary pregnancy termination or delivery occurred. RESULTS: None of the participants had any obstetric complication. However, in addition to fluticasone, most of the 12 cases were simultaneously exposed to a variety of medications. There were 3 abortions (one spontaneous and 2 requested by the patients arguing personal reasons). Live born babies without any evidence of major congenital malformations included 8 singleton babies and 2 twins. Of them, 3 babies were born prematurely. CONCLUSIONS: Our results are in agreement with previous large studies where no increased rate of adverse outcomes was reported with the use of inhaled corticosteroids during 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 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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".