Effect of Atypical Antipsychotics on Fetal Growth: Is the Placenta Involved?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".