The safety of ondansetron for nausea and vomiting of pregnancy: a prospective comparative study
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
OBJECTIVE: Ondansetron (Zofran) is a drug used for the treatment of nausea and vomiting caused by cancer chemotherapy. Despite the fact that it is not indicated, women are being prescribed this drug for the treatment of nausea and vomiting of pregnancy (NVP). There is a paucity of information on fetal safety for this indication. The objective of this study is to determine whether this drug increases the baseline rate of major malformations. DESIGN: A prospective comparative observational study. SETTING: Teratogen Information Services (TIS). POPULATION: Pregnant women. METHODS: Our three groups included women who were exposed to ondansetron and women exposed to (1) other anti-emetics and (2) non-teratogen exposures. All of the women called either our NVP Helpline or TIS at The Motherisk Program in Toronto, Canada, or The Mothersafe Program in Sydney, Australia. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Rates of major malformation. RESULTS: We have completed 176 pregnancy outcomes in each group. In the ondansetron cohort, there were 169 live births, 5 miscarriages, 2 therapeutic abortions, 6 (3.6%) major malformations and the mean birthweight was 3362 g [SD 525]. There were no statistical differences in any of the study endpoints between the ondansetron and the comparison groups. CONCLUSIONS: This drug does not appear (although the sample size is limited) to be associated with an increased risk for major malformations above baseline.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 it