Birth Outcomes in Women with a History of Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether children born to women who had juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) had more adverse birth outcomes than children born to mothers who never had JIA. METHODS: Our cohort study used data from physician billing and hospitalizations covering the province of Quebec, Canada. We identified all women with JIA with a first-time birth between January 1, 1983, and December 31, 2010, and assembled a control cohort of first-time mothers without JIA from the same administrative data, matching 4:1 for date of first birth, maternal age, and area of residence. We compared outcomes (stillbirth, prematurity, small for gestational age, and major congenital anomalies) in the JIA versus non-JIA groups using logistic regression. RESULTS: Mean age at delivery was 24.7 years in the JIA group (n = 1681) and 25.0 years for the non-JIA group (n = 6724). Women who had JIA were at higher risk for a premature baby [adjusted relative risk (RR) 1.20, 95% CI 1.01-1.42], a baby small for gestational age (adjusted RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.04-1.37), and a child with a congenital malformation (adjusted RR 6.51, 95% CI 5.05-8.39). Neural tube defects were higher in the JIA offspring: 1.61% (95% CI 1.11-2.33) versus 0.03% (95% CI 0.01-0.11) in the non-JIA group, as were congenital heart defects: 1.07% (95% CI 0.68-1.69) versus 0.58% (95% CI 0.42-0.79). CONCLUSION: Most women with JIA will deliver a normal baby, even though they are at higher risk for having a child with adverse birth outcomes. Research is needed to understand pathophysiologic mechanisms and to investigate the effects of medications during childhood and youth on future birth outcomes.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".