MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160473344 · doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.158.10.1728

Pregnancy Outcome Following Gestational Exposure to Venlafaxine: A Multicenter Prospective Controlled Study

2001· article· en· W2160473344 on OpenAlexaff
Adrienne Einarson, Bumn Fatoye, Moumita Sarkar, Sharon Voyer Lavigne, Joanne Brochu, Christina Chambers, Pierpaolo Mastroiacovo, Antonio Addis, Doreen Matsui, Thomas R. Einarson, Gideon Koren

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Psychiatry · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVenlafaxinePregnancyMedicineObstetricsTeratologyGestationVenlafaxine HydrochlorideProspective cohort studyPediatricsPsychiatryInternal medicineAntidepressantAnxiety

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Because there are no studies available on the safety of venlafaxine during pregnancy, the authors' goal in this study was to determine whether venlafaxine increases the risk for major malformations. METHOD: Data on 150 women exposed to venlafaxine during pregnancy in seven pregnancy counseling centers were compared with data from studies of pregnant women who 1) received selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor antidepressants (SSRIs) (N=150) and 2) who received nonteratogenic drugs (N=150). RESULTS: Among the 150 women who were exposed to venlafaxine during pregnancy, 125 had live births, 18 had spontaneous abortions, and seven had therapeutic abortions; two of the babies had major malformations. There were no significant differences between these women and the two comparison groups on any of the measures analyzed. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that the use of venlafaxine during pregnancy does not increase the rates of major malformations above the baseline rate of 1%-3%.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations242
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of PsychiatrySame topicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and PostpartumFrench-language works237,207