MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123724816 · doi:10.1503/cmaj.101063

Corticosteroid use during pregnancy and risk of orofacial clefts

2011· article· en· W2123724816 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Association Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and Medication Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePregnancyOdds ratioConfidence intervalPediatricsObstetricsCohort studyConfoundingCohortDentistryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The association between the risk of orofacial clefts in infants and the use of corticosteroids during pregnancy is unclear from the available evidence. We conducted a nationwide cohort study of all live births in Denmark over a 12-year period. METHODS: We collected data on all live births in Denmark from Jan. 1, 1996, to Sept. 30, 2008. We included live births for which information was available from nationwide health registries on the use of corticosteroids during pregnancy, the diagnosis of an orofacial cleft and possible confounders. RESULTS: There were 832,636 live births during the study period. Exposure to corticosteroids during the first trimester occurred in 51,973 of the pregnancies. A total of 1232 isolated orofacial clefts (i.e., cleft lip, cleft palate, or cleft lip and cleft palate) were diagnosed within the first year of life, including 84 instances in which the infant had been exposed to corticosteroids during the first trimester of pregnancy. We did not identify any statistically significant increased risk of orofacial clefts associated with the use of corticosteroids: cleft lip with or without cleft palate, prevalence odds ratio (OR) 1.05 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.80-1.38]; cleft palate alone, prevalence OR 1.23 (95% CI 0.83-1.82). Odds ratios for risk of orofacial clefts by method of delivery (i.e., oral, inhalant, nasal spray, or dermatologic and other topicals) were consistent with the overall results of the study and did not display significant heterogeneity, although the OR for cleft lip with or without cleft palate associated with the use of dermatologic corticosteroids was 1.45 (95% CI 1.03-2.05). INTERPRETATION: Our results add to the safety information on a class of drugs commonly used during pregnancy. Our study did not show an increased risk of orofacial clefts with the use of corticosteroids during pregnancy. Indepth investigation of the pattern of association between orofacial clefts and the use of dermatologic corticosteroids during pregnancy indicated that this result did not signify a causal connection and likely arose from multiple statistical comparisons.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.221 · 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