Effects of aspirin consumption during pregnancy on pregnancy outcomes: Meta‐analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We assessed the effects and safety of aspirin treatment during pregnancy on fetal and neonatal outcomes. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE (1966-2001), EMBASE (1980-2000), TOXLINE (1994-2000), EB M Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (1991-2000), Reproductive Toxicology (2001), teratology texts, and bibliographies of all the included studies. We looked for published randomized controlled studies reporting aspirin treatment to improve outcomes of moderate- and high-risk pregnancies. The key words used to search for articles about exposure to aspirin were salicylic acid, pregnancy, and pregnancy complications; key words used to search for outcome were neonatal diseases and abnormalities. Based on our search strategy, 1904 citations were identified; their titles and abstracts were reviewed by one reviewer. Of these citations, 182 papers were selected for detailed review. Two reviewers independently determined whether a study should be included in the final analysis. In cases of disagreement, the decision was based on the assessment of a third reviewer. RESULTS: Data were extracted independently by each reviewer. We calculated the pooled relative risk (RR) or weighted mean difference and 95% confidence intervals (CI), assuming a random-effect model. Thirty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria. The risk for miscarriage did not differ between women treated with aspirin andplacebo (seven studies; RR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.71-119). Women who took aspirin had a significantly lower risk of preterm delivery than did those treated with placebo (22 studies; RR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.86-0.98). There was no significant difference in perinatal mortality (20 studies; RR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.81-1.05) and in the rate of small-for-gestational-age infants (12 studies; RR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.87-1.07) among offspring of mothers treated with aspirin and those of mothers treated with a placebo. CONCLUSION: For women with moderate- and high-risk pregnancies, aspirin treatment seemed to have a small but significant effect on reducing the rate of preterm deliveries, but did not reduce the rate of perinatal death.
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 | 0.019 | 0.050 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.019 | 0.049 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".