Opium use during pregnancy and infant size at birth: a cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The reported positive association between opiatic drug use during pregnancy and adverse pregnancy outcomes might be confounded by other factors related to high-risk behaviors, including the use of other harmful substances. In rural areas of Iran, opium use during pregnancy is relatively common among women who otherwise do not have a hazardous lifestyle, which reduces the risk of residual confounding and increasing the possibility to identify its effects. We aimed to examine the association of antenatal exposure to opium with risks of small for gestational age, short birth length, and small head circumference at birth. METHOD: In this cohort study in the rural area of the Golestan province, Iran, we randomly selected 920 women who were exposed to opium during pregnancy and 920 unexposed women during 2008-2010. Log-binomial regression was used to estimate risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the associations between prenatal exposure to opium and risks of small for gestational age, short birth length, and small head circumference at birth. RESULTS: Compared with non-use of opium and tobacco during pregnancy, using opium only and dual use of opium and tobacco were associated with increased risks of small for gestational age at births (RR = 1.71; 95% CI 1.34-2.18 and RR = 1.62; 95% CI 1.13-2.30, respectively). Compared with non-use of opium and tobacco, exposure to only opium or dual use of opium and tobacco were also associated with more than doubled increased risks of short birth length, and small head circumference in term infants. CONCLUSION: Maternal opium use during pregnancy is associated with increased risks of giving birth to a small for gestational age infant, as well as a term infant with short birth length or small head circumference.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".