Abrupt discontinuation of psychotropic drugs during pregnancy: fear of teratogenic risk and impact of counselling.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the consequences to mother and baby of abruptly discontinuing antidepressant or benzodiazepine medication during pregnancy and to assess the impact of our counselling. PARTICIPANTS: All women who consulted the Motherisk Program between November 1996 and December 1997 and who stopped taking antidepressant or benzodiazepine medication when pregnancy was confirmed agreed to participate in the study. DESIGN AND INTERVENTIONS: Subjects were interviewed, received counselling, and completed a questionnaire 1 month after their initial call and after the birth of their baby. RESULTS: Of 36 women who completed the study, 34 discontinued their medication abruptly for fear of harming the fetus, 28 on the advice of their physician; 26 (70.3%) women reported physical and psychological adverse effects, 11 reported psychological effects only, and 11 reported suicidal ideation (4 were admitted to hospital). After counselling, 22 of 36 (61.1%) women resumed taking their medication, and 4 found that they no longer required it. One woman had a therapeutic abortion and 2 experienced spontaneous abortions; there were therefore 35 healthy babies (including 2 sets of twins) born to 33 women; 14 of 21 mothers breast-fed their babies while taking their psychotropic medication, with no adverse effects reported. CONCLUSIONS: When assessing the risks and benefits of taking psychotropic medication during pregnancy, women and their physicians should be aware that the abrupt discontinuation of psychotropic drugs can lead to serious adverse effects. Counselling is effective in reassuring women to adhere to therapy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".