Prenatal Protease Inhibitor Use and Risk of Preterm Birth among HIV‐Infected Women Initiating Antiretroviral Drugs during Pregnancy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Conflicting results have been reported among studies of protease inhibitor (PI) use during pregnancy and preterm birth. Uncontrolled confounding by indication may explain some of the differences among studies. METHODS: In total, 777 human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected pregnant women in a prospective cohort who were not receiving antiretroviral (ARV) treatment at conception were studied. Births <37 weeks gestation were reviewed, and deliveries due to spontaneous labor and/or rupture of membranes were identified. Risk of preterm birth and low birth weight (<2500 g) were evaluated by using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Of the study population, 558 (72%) received combination ARV with PI during pregnancy, and a total of 130 preterm births were observed. In adjusted analyses, combination ARV with PI was not significantly associated with spontaneous preterm birth, compared to ARV without PI (odds ratio [OR], 1.22; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70-2.12). Sensitivity analyses that included women who received ARV prior to pregnancy also did not identify a significant association (OR, 1.34; 95% CI, 0.84-2.16). Low birth weight results were similar. CONCLUSIONS: No evidence of an association between use of combination ARV with PI during pregnancy and preterm birth was found. Our study supports current guidelines that promote consideration of combination ARV for all HIV-infected pregnant women.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".