Risk of Vaginal Bleeding and Postpartum Hemorrhage After Use of Antidepressants in Pregnancy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to examine obstetric bleeding outcomes after exposure during pregnancy to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), tricyclic (TCAs), and other antidepressants (OADs).The Norwegian Mother and Child Cohort Study and the Medical Birth Registry of Norway constituted the data source for the present study. We included 57,279 pregnant women, of which 1.02% reported use of antidepressants during pregnancy, mostly SSRIs/SNRIs (0.92%). We categorized exposure according to antidepressant use in pregnancy (SSRIs/SNRIs, n = 527; TCAs/OADs, n = 59; nonexposed, nondepressed, n = 55,411) with inclusion of a disease comparison group (nonexposed, depressed, n = 1282). We used logistic regression to estimate adjusted odds ratio (aOR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for vaginal bleeding outcomes in pregnancy and postpartum hemorrhage.Compared with nonexposed subjects, first trimester exposure to SSRIs/SNRIs or TCAs/OADs did not confer any increased risk of vaginal bleeding in early pregnancy (aOR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.72-1.16 and aOR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.36-1.92, respectively). No increased risk for vaginal bleeding in midpregnancy was observed among users of SSRIs/SNRIs (aOR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.50-1.31) or TCAs/OADs (aOR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.26-3.53) in second trimester. Exposure to SSRIs/SNRIs during gestational week 30 to childbirth did not confer any increased risk of postpartum hemorrhage after vaginal (aOR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.47-1.74) or cesarean (aOR, 1.47; 95% CI, 0.51-4.22) delivery. Women in the disease comparison group presented a significant moderate increased risk of vaginal bleeding in early pregnancy (aOR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.06-1.39) and midpregnancy (aOR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.07-1.55) but not postpartum.Among this Norwegian cohort of pregnant women, use of antidepressants in pregnancy was not associated with any obstetrical bleeding outcome.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".