MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2158731325 · doi:10.1080/10641950601147937

Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers in Pregnancy: A Case Report and Systematic Review of the Literature

2007· review· en· W2158731325 on OpenAlexaff
E. Yadira Velázquez-Armenta, Jung Yeol Han, June Seek Choi, Kwang Moon Yang, Alejandro A. Nava‐Ocampo

Bibliographic record

VenueHypertension in Pregnancy · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePregnancyAdverse effectIrbesartanAbortionAngiotensin Receptor BlockersObstetricsLive birthGynecologyInternal medicineAngiotensin-converting enzymeBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To describe the case of a woman exposed to angiotensin-II receptor blockers (ARBs) in the preconceptional period and to systematically review the literature on the safety of these drugs when used by pregnant women. METHODS: The case was identified at the Korean Motherisk Program (Seoul). For the systematic review, we searched the PubMed for case reports, case series, and post-marketing surveys. RESULTS: A hypertensive woman was exposed to irbesartan prior to conception. The embryo had delayed development of upper and lower extremities and decreased digital groove. A karyotype identified a 45,XO Turner syndrome. The patient had a spontaneous abortion. Including the case reported here, 64 published cases were identified in total; 57.8% had favorable and 42.2% had unfavorable outcomes. Duration of treatment during pregnancy among women who had adverse fetal outcomes was 26.3 +/- 10.5 weeks (mean +/- SD), compared with 17.3 +/- 11.6 weeks in those who had favorable outcomes (p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Exposure to ARBs for a period longer than the first trimester of pregnancy appears to be associated with a high risk for adverse fetal outcomes.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations33
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHypertension in PregnancySame topicPregnancy and preeclampsia studiesFrench-language works237,207