PIII-51In utero exposure to HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors; effects on fetal and neonatal outcome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND Since HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) are widely used for the treatment of hyperlipidemia in women of childbearing age, the pregnancy safety data regarding statins are urgently needed. Recent case series based on voluntary reports described cases of malformations including central nervous system defects and unilateral limb defects. This raised concerns about the fetal safety of statins. The objective of this study is to determine whether gestational use of statins poses substantial fetal toxicity. METHODS Pregnancy outcome of 45 exposed to statins and 45 matched comparison group were followed. There was no significant difference in the rate of major malformations between cases (1/45) and controls (3/45) (p=0.38). The pregnancy outcomes, such as live birth (p=0.10), spontaneous abortion (p=0.72), and therapeutic abortion were not statistically different between the exposed and control groups. CONCLUSION Our pilot cohort did not demonstrate the malformation patterns reported in a case series based on voluntary reports. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics (2005) 79, P72–P72; doi: 10.1016/j.clpt.2005.12.259
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".