Pregnancy outcome following use of large doses of vitamin B<sub>6</sub>in the first trimester
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vitamin B6 is often prescribed for the treatment of nausea and vomiting of pregnancy (NVP), at much higher doses than initially recommended. Large doses of vitamin B6 have been associated with cases of neuropathy. We set out to assess whether higher than standard doses of vitamin B6 during the first trimester of pregnancy were associated with a risk of maternal adverse events, major malformations, miscarriages or low birth weight. This was a prospective comparative observational study. The study group included women who were exposed to >50 mg/day of vitamin B6 during the first trimester; the control group included pregnant women with a non-teratogen exposure. A total of 192 pregnancies were followed-up. The mean dose of B6 used in the study group was 132.3 mg/day (median 110 mg/day, range 50 - 510 mg/day), for a mean period of 9 +/- 4.2 weeks. In this group (n = 96), there were 91 live births, one major malformation and the mean birth weight was 3,542 +/- 512 g. There were no statistical differences in the study endpoints between the vitamin B6 and the control groups. Within the limits of our sample size, higher than standard doses of vitamin B6 do not appear to be associated with an increased risk for major malformations.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".