Are SSRIs safe for pregnant and breastfeeding women?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To summarize the literature on use of the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) class of antidepressants for pregnant and breastfeeding women. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION: MEDLINE was searched over the past 9 years. An examination of the literature over the last 8 years was included in this review. Primary studies consist of prospective investigations and case studies. Evidence for the safety of SSRIs is limited, but some good studies describe the effects of untreated depression. SYNTHESIS: All studies report that infants are exposed to SSRIs; the drugs can be measured in their plasma and urine. Some evidence shows an increase in minor perinatal complications among infants exposed to SSRIs late in gestation or while nursing. No studies, however, have found an increase in major fetal malformations or pregnancy-related complications. The only investigation of long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes found no negative outcomes among infants exposed to SSRIs during pregnancy. Data are scarce, and readers are cautioned to take into consideration the limitations of the studies reviewed before making definite treatment decisions. CONCLUSIONS: Major fetal malformations and exposure to SSRIs during pregnancy and lactation do not appear to be associated. Some minor perinatal complications have been reported. Data on the long-term developmental outcomes of children exposed to SSRIs in utero and during breastfeeding are limited.
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 | 0.003 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".