MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2020235412 · doi:10.1136/ebm.12.1.26

Fetal exposure to ACE inhibitors increased risk of major congenital malformations

2007· letter· en· W2020235412 on OpenAlexaff
Paul E. Szmitko, David N. Juurlink

Bibliographic record

VenueEvidence-Based Medicine · 2007
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVitamin D Research Studies
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCongenital malformationsFetusMedicineObstetricsPregnancyBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cooper WO, Hernandez-Diaz S, Arbogast PG, et al. Major congenital malformations after first-trimester exposure to ACE inhibitors. N Engl J Med 2006;354:2443–51. [OpenUrl][1][CrossRef][2][PubMed][3][Web of Science][4] Q Is fetal exposure to angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors during the first trimester of pregnancy associated with increased risk of congenital malformations? Clinical impact ratings GP/FP/Primary care ★★★★★★☆ Cardiology ★★★★★★☆ Obstetrics ★★★★★★☆ Paediatrics ★★★★★☆☆ Paediatric neonatology ★★★★★★★ Paediatric hospital medicine ★★★★★★☆ ### ![Graphic][5] Design: database linked cohort study. ### ![Graphic][6] Setting: Tennessee, USA. ### ![Graphic][7] Patients: 29 507 infants born between 1985 and 2000 whose mothers were enrolled in Medicaid. 209 infants had been exposed to ACE inhibitors in the first trimester only, 202 infants had been exposed to other antihypertensive drugs in the first trimester only, and 29 096 had had no such exposure. Exclusion criteria: evidence of maternal diabetes before or during pregnancy, maternal prescription for angiotensin receptor antagonists, fetal exposure to ACE inhibitors or other antihypertensive drugs beyond the first trimester, or fetal exposure to … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DNew%2BEngland%2BJournal%2Bof%2BMedicine%26rft.stitle%253DNEJM%26rft.issn%253D0028-4793%26rft.aulast%253DCooper%26rft.auinit1%253DW.%2BO.%26rft.volume%253D354%26rft.issue%253D23%26rft.spage%253D2443%26rft.epage%253D2451%26rft.atitle%253DMajor%2Bcongenital%2Bmalformations%2Bafter%2Bfirst-trimester%2Bexposure%2Bto%2BACE%2Binhibitors.%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1056%252FNEJMoa055202%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F16760444%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1056/NEJMoa055202&link_type=DOI [3]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=16760444&link_type=MED&atom=%2Febmed%2F12%2F1%2F26.atom [4]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=000238100800006&link_type=ISI [5]: /embed/inline-graphic-1.gif [6]: /embed/inline-graphic-2.gif [7]: /embed/inline-graphic-3.gif

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Commentary
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablelow
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.284 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designObservational · Not applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical · Commentary

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvidence-Based Medicine→Same topicVitamin D Research Studies→French-language works237,207→