Pregnancy outcome of women exposed to azathioprine during pregnancy
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Azathioprine (AZP) interferes with nucleic acid synthesis and is teratogenic in animals. In view of the paucity of information on the use of AZP during pregnancy we investigated this subject in a prospective, controlled, multicenter study. Our objective was too determine whether exposure to AZP during pregnancy increases the risk for major malformations and to determine the effect on pregnancy outcome. METHODS: Pregnant women on AZP who contacted one of seven teratogen information services were compared to a cohort of pregnant women who contacted two of the seven teratogen information services and took nonteratogenic treatments during their pregnancy. RESULTS: Follow-up was completed on 189 women in the AZP group and compared to 230 women in the control group. The rate of major malformations did not differ between groups with six neonates in each; the AZP rate was 3.5% and the control group rate was 3.0% (p = .775; OR 1.17; CI: 0.37, 3.69). The mean birth weight and gestational age were lower in the AZP group (2,995 g vs. 3,252 g [p = .001, difference of mean: 257, 95% CI: 106.3, 408.1] and 37.8 weeks vs. 39.1 weeks [p = .001, difference of mean: 1.3, 95% CI: .5, 2.0], respectively). The AZP group had more cases of prematurity (21.4% vs. 5.2% [p < .001; OR 4.0; 95% CI: 2.0, 8.06]) and low birth weight (23% vs. 6.0% [p < .001; OR 3.81; 95% CI: 2.0, 7.2]). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that AZP (50-100 mg/day) does not triple the rate of birth defects; however, it is associated with lower birth weight, gestational age, and prematurity. Larger studies are needed to confirm these observations.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it