Bibliographic record
Abstract
Depression, anxiety disorders, anorexia nervosa and bulimia, all indications for antidepressant use, are common disorders in women of childbearing age. Nevertheless, antidepressant use during the gestational period remains a controversial topic. Given that 50 % of pregnancies are unplanned, the safety of antidepressants during the first trimester of pregnancy, a critical period for foetal development, has become a major public health concern. Until now, most studies suggest that physicians may often under-prescribe or discontinue antidepressants at the time of conception and during pregnancy. This may be a consequence of the concern over the safety of these agents in pregnant women and the risks they may pose to the foetus. In fact, recent studies and warnings from Health Canada and the US Food and Drug Administration have reinforced this uncertainty regarding the adverse effects of antidepressant use on the foetus. On the other hand, discontinuation of antidepressant use during pregnancy was also recently associated with maternal relapse of depression and withdrawal symptoms, which is not optimal for the mother and her foetus. Consequently, women who wish to become pregnant and who suffer from psychiatric disorders are faced with the difficult task of deciding whether to continue or discontinue their antidepressant during pregnancy. At this time, it appears important to take into account all evidence-based data to evaluate the risks/benefits of using antidepressants during the gestational period in order to help mothers make the best choice for themselves, and their infants.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
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".