Methylphenidate in Pregnancy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Methylphenidate is a central nervous system stimulant medicinally used in the treatment of attention-deficit disorder with or without hyperactivity (ADD/ADHD). Data on its use in human pregnancy are limited. The primary objective of the study was to evaluate the risk of major congenital anomalies after pregnancy exposure to methylphenidate for medical indications. METHODS: In a prospective, comparative, multicenter observational study performed in 4 participating Teratology Information Services (in Jerusalem, Berlin, Newcastle upon Tyne, and Toronto) between 1996 and 2013, methylphenidate-exposed pregnancies were compared with pregnancies counseled for nonteratogenic exposure (NTE) after matching by maternal age, gestational age, and year at initial contact. RESULTS: 382 methylphenidate-exposed pregnancies (89.5% in the first trimester) were followed up. The overall rate of major congenital anomalies was similar between the groups (10/309 = 3.2% [methylphenidate] vs 13/358 = 3.6% [NTE], P = .780). The rates of major congenital anomalies (6/247 = 2.4% [methylphenidate] vs 12/358 = 3.4% [NTE], P = .511) and cardiovascular anomalies (2/247 = 0.8% [methylphenidate] vs 3/358 = 0.8% [NTE], P = .970) were also similar after exclusion of genetic or cytogenetic anomalies and limiting methylphenidate exposure to the period of organogenesis (weeks 4-13 after the last menstrual period). There was a higher rate of miscarriages and elective terminations of pregnancy in the methylphenidate group. Significant predictors for the miscarriages using Cox proportional hazards model were methylphenidate exposure (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 1.98; 95% CI, 1.23-3.20; P = .005) and past miscarriage (adjusted HR = 1.35; 95% CI, 1.18-1.55; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The present study suggests that methylphenidate does not seem to increase the risk for major malformations. Further studies are required to establish its pregnancy safety and its possible association with miscarriages.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".