Affect expression in prenatally psychotropic exposed and nonexposed mother–infant dyads
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This prospective study examined infant, maternal, and dyadic affective profiles at three months postpartum in infant–mother dyads that were exposed to psychotropic medications in utero compared with nonexposed control dyads. Control dyads of nondepressed mothers and their infants showed many similarities in affect expression with mother–infant dyads who were exposed to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) alone for treatment of maternal depression. In contrast, mothers who received SSRIs and Rivotril (Benzodiazepine derivative) for treatment of depression and anxiety expressed both positive and negative affect towards their infants. Clinical implications regarding use of psychotropic medications such as SSRIs alone or in combination with other drugs for treatment of maternal anxiety and depression during pregnancy are discussed. Clinicians should be aware of the possible differential response in maternal–infant interaction in a mixed diagnosis group (i.e., depression and anxiety) regarding infant temperament, possibly suggesting latent behavioral teratogenicity with psychotropics. ©2002 Michigan Association for Infant Mental Health.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".