Exposure to specific herbal products during pregnancy and the risk of low birth weight.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: Despite the fact that herbal products (HP) are used frequently during gestation worldwide, studies indicate that they may not be free of danger for fetuses. Evidence about the safety of HP use during pregnancy and their impact on pregnancy outcomes is currently lacking. OBJECTIVE: To quantify the association between HP use during the last 2 trimesters of pregnancy (≥15 weeks of gestation [WG]) and more specifically, between use of chamomile (Anthemis nobilis), flax (Linum usitatissimum), peppermint (M. balsamea), or green tea (Camellia sinensis) (alone or in combination with other HPs) and the risk of low birth weight (LBW). DESIGN: We evaluated data from the Quebec Pregnancy Registry, which was created by the linkage of 3 administrative databases in Quebec, and a self-administered questionnaire mailed to subjects. Participants 8505 women were randomly selected from the registry. Overall, 38.5% of women (n = 3273) returned their questionnaires, and 3183 were included in the study (8 were excluded because of missing values on birth weight or giving birth to twins or triplets). Outcome measures We performed a case-control analysis. Cases were defined as women who delivered a newborn <2500g and controls as women who delivered a newborn ≥2500g. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to analyze data. RESULTS: Amongst the selected 3183 participants, 424 (13.32%) were cases. After adjusting for potential confounders, no statistically significant associations were found between the use of any HP during the last 2 trimesters of pregnancy and the risk of LBW, or between the use of flax, chamomile, peppermint, or green tea (alone or in combination with other HPs) during the last 2 trimesters of pregnancy and the risk of LBW. CONCLUSION: HP use during the last 2 trimesters of pregnancy and more specifically, use of flax, chamomile, peppermint, or green tea alone or in combination with other HPs did not significantly increase the risk of LBW.
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".