Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the frequency of malformations among infants born to women who had taken lamotrigine or carbamazepine as part of polytherapy during the first trimester of pregnancy. DESIGN: A cohort of women enrolled during pregnancy in the North American AED (Antiepileptic Drug) Pregnancy Registry between February 1, 1997, and June 1, 2010. Information on AED use and demographic characteristics was collected in 3 telephone interviews. SETTING: United States and Canada. PATIENTS: A total of 6857 pregnant women taking an AED for any reason. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Major congenital malformations were identified at birth and through the first 12 weeks after delivery. Diagnoses were based on the mother's report and confirmed by medical records. The risks of malformations were compared between polytherapy and monotherapy groups, using exact odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: The risk of malformations was 1.9% among infants exposed to lamotrigine as monotherapy (n = 1441). Among the infants exposed to lamotrigine as polytherapy (n = 505), the risks were 9.1% for lamotrigine plus valproate sodium (OR, 5.0; 95% CI, 1.5-14.0) and 2.9% for lamotrigine plus any other AEDs (1.5; 0.7-3.0). The risk of malformations was 2.9% for the infants exposed to carbamazepine monotherapy (n = 1012). For the infants exposed to carbamazepine as polytherapy (n = 365), the risks were 15.4% for carbamazepine plus valproate (OR, 6.2; 95% CI, 2.0-16.5) and 2.5% for carbamazepine plus any other AEDs (0.8; 0.3-1.9). Confounding by factors such as periconceptional vitamin use, cigarette smoking, alcohol use, and chronic maternal diseases did not explain the results. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of malformations among infants exposed to lamotrigine and carbamazepine as polytherapy was higher than the corresponding monotherapies only when the polytherapy includes valproate. These findings suggest that counseling for fetal risks from AED polytherapy should be based on the specific drugs included.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".