MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2059716528 · doi:10.1155/2012/315203

Effect of Atypical Antipsychotics on Fetal Growth: Is the Placenta Involved?

2012· review· en· W2059716528 on OpenAlexaff
Sandeep Raha, Valerie H. Taylor, Alison C. Holloway

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pregnancy · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
Canadian institutionsWomen's College HospitalUniversity of TorontoMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePlacentaFetusAntipsychoticPregnancyAtypical antipsychoticSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)BioinformaticsPsychiatryBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is currently considerable uncertainty regarding prescribing practices for pregnant women with severe and persistent psychiatric disorders. The physician and the mother have to balance the risks of untreated psychiatric illness against the potential fetal toxicity associated with pharmacological exposure. This is especially true for women taking atypical antipsychotics. Although these drugs have limited evidence for teratological risk, there are reports of altered fetal growth, both increased and decreased, with maternal atypical antipsychotic use. These effects may be mediated through changes in the maternal metabolism which in turn impacts placental function. However, the presence of receptors targeted by atypical antipsychotics in cell lineages present in the placenta suggests that these drugs can also have direct effects on placental function and development. The signaling pathways involved in linking the effects of atypical antipsychotics to placental dysfunction, ultimately resulting in altered fetal growth, remain elusive. This paper focuses on some possible pathways which may link atypical antipsychotics to placental dysfunction.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.601
Threshold uncertainty score0.934

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.318 · 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

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations21
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of PregnancySame topicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and PostpartumFrench-language works237,207