MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077392308 · doi:10.1002/bdrb.20238

Antihypertensive medication use during pregnancy and the risk of major congenital malformations or small‐for‐gestational‐age newborns

2010· article· en· W2077392308 on OpenAlexaffabout
Hamid Reza Nakhai-Pour, Évelyne Rey, Anick Bérard

Bibliographic record

VenueBirth Defects Research Part B Developmental and Reproductive Toxicology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSmall for gestational agePregnancyOdds ratioGestational ageObstetricsGestational hypertensionBirth weightConfidence intervalGestationPediatricsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In spite of the widespread use of antihypertensives during pregnancy, data on their risks and benefits for the newborn are limited. We investigated the risk of major congenital malformations or small-for-gestational-age newborns (SGA) in relation to gestational use of antihypertensives. METHODS: Within the Quebec Pregnancy Registry, we conducted two case-control studies. First, cases were defined as major congenital malformations diagnosed during the first year of life and controls were selected from the same cohort; index date was date of delivery. Gestational exposure was defined as filling a prescription for an antihypertensive during the 1st trimester of pregnancy. Next, cases (SGA) were defined as newborns with a birth weight <10th percentile for that gestational age and gender; controls were the newborns with a birth weight > or =10 percentile. Gestational exposure was defined as filling a prescription for an antihypertensive during the 2nd or 3rd trimester. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). RESULTS: We found that overall antihypertensives use during the 2nd or 3rd trimesters of pregnancy was associated with a higher risk of SGA (OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.17-1.99). Moreover, selective beta-blocker (OR 6.00, 95% CI 1.06-33.87), alpha beta blocker (OR 2.26, 95% CI 1.04-4.88), or centrally-acting adrenergic agents use (OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.00-2.89) was associated with a higher risk of SGA compared to non-use. CONCLUSION: Gestational use of antihypertensives, especially beta-blocker, alpha beta blocker, or centrally-acting adrenergic agents, may increase the risk of SGA.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.111
Threshold uncertainty score0.221

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations69
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBirth Defects Research Part B Developmental and Reproductive ToxicologySame topicPregnancy and preeclampsia studiesFrench-language works237,207