Pregnancy Outcome After Exposure to Antidepressants and the Role of Maternal Depression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Results of previous studies on the safety of antidepressants during pregnancy have been conflicting. The primary objective of this study was to investigate whether first-trimester exposure to antidepressants, specifically selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), was associated with increased risk of congenital malformations. The secondary objective was to examine the effects of exposure to antidepressants during pregnancy on birth weight and gestational age.We included 63,395 women from the Norwegian Mother and Child Cohort Study. The women had completed 2 self-administered questionnaires at gestational weeks 17 and 30 on medication use and medical, sociodemographic, and psychological factors. Data on pregnancy outcome were retrieved from the Medical Birth Registry of Norway.Of the 63,395 women, 699 (1.1%) reported using antidepressants during pregnancy, most frequently SSRIs (0.9%). Exposure to SSRIs during the first trimester was not associated with increased risk of congenital malformations in general (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.22; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81-1.84) or cardiovascular malformations (adjusted OR, 1.51; 95% CI, 0.67-3.43). Exposure to antidepressants during pregnancy was not associated with increased risk of preterm birth (adjusted OR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.87-1.69) or low birth weight (adjusted OR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.33-1.16).This study does not suggest a strongly increased risk of malformations, preterm birth, or low birth weight following prenatal exposure to antidepressants. Without adjustments for level of maternal depression and various sociodemographic and lifestyle factors, antidepressant use during pregnancy would wrongly have been associated with an increased risk of preterm birth.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".