MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Oral hormone pregnancy tests and the risks of congenital malformations: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2019· review· en· W2899060369 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Carl Heneghan, Jeffrey K Aronson, Elizabeth Spencer, Bennett Holman, Kamal R Mahtani, Rafael Perera, Igho Onakpoya

Bibliographic record

VenueF1000Research · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPrenatal Screening and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNIHR School for Primary Care ResearchNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsMedicineOdds ratioMeta-analysisPregnancyCase-control studyObstetricsInternal medicineBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<ns3:p><ns3:bold>Background: </ns3:bold>Oral hormone pregnancy tests (HPTs), such as Primodos, containing ethinylestradiol and high doses of norethisterone, were given to over a million women from 1958 to 1978, when Primodos was withdrawn from the market because of concerns about possible teratogenicity. We aimed to study the association between maternal exposure to oral HPTs and congenital malformations.</ns3:p><ns3:p> <ns3:bold>Methods:</ns3:bold> We have performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of case-control and cohort studies that included data from pregnant women and were exposed to oral HPTs within the estimated first three months of pregnancy, if compared with a relevant control group. We used random-effects meta-analysis and assessed the quality of each study using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale for non-randomized studies.</ns3:p><ns3:p> <ns3:bold>Results: </ns3:bold>We found 16 case control studies and 10 prospective cohort studies, together including 71 330 women, of whom 4,209 were exposed to HPTs. Exposure to oral HPTs was associated with a 40% increased risk of all congenital malformations: pooled odds ratio (OR) = 1.40 (95% CI 1.18 to 1.66; P&lt;0.0001; I<ns3:sup>2</ns3:sup> = 0%). Exposure to HPTs was associated with an increased risk of congenital heart malformations: pooled OR = 1.89 (95% CI 1.32 to 2.72; P = 0.0006; I<ns3:sup>2</ns3:sup>=0%); nervous system malformations OR = 2.98 (95% CI 1.32 to 6.76; P = 0.0109 I<ns3:sup>2</ns3:sup> = 78%); gastrointestinal malformations, OR = 4.50 (95% CI 0.63 to 32.20; P = 0.13; I<ns3:sup>2</ns3:sup> = 54%); musculoskeletal malformations, OR = 2.24 (95% CI 1.23 to 4.08; P= 0.009; I<ns3:sup>2</ns3:sup> = 0%); the VACTERL syndrome (Vertebral defects, Anal atresia, Cardiovascular anomalies, Tracheoesophageal fistula, Esophageal atresia, Renal anomalies, and Limb defects), OR = 7.47 (95% CI 2.92 to 19.07; P &lt; 0.0001; I<ns3:sup>2</ns3:sup> = 0%).</ns3:p><ns3:p> <ns3:bold>Conclusions:</ns3:bold> This systematic review and meta-analysis shows that use of oral HPTs in pregnancy is associated with increased risks of congenital malformations.</ns3:p>

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.829
Threshold uncertainty score0.586

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.398
GPT teacher head0.486
Teacher spread0.088 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueF1000ResearchSame topicPrenatal Screening and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207