Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: As a general rule, medical professionals agree that it is best to avoid all drugs during pregnancy. Sometimes, however, drugs are essential to a woman’s health and well-being and to the safety of her fetus. Aim: The aim of this article is to review the pros and cons of pregnant women with schizophrenia remaining on antipsychotic medication. Method: The medical database, PubMed, was initially searched for literature in English of the last 5 years using the search terms: “pregnancy” and “antipsychotics”. Forty-four papers were selected. Results: There is no easy answer to the question of the wisdom of continuing antipsychotics during pregnancy. The reviewed literature suggests that the decision depends on the woman’s previous experience, the severity of her illness, her stage of pregnancy, and the specifics of the drug she is taking. Conclusion: As long as the woman is well-informed and competent to make decisions, she needs to carefully weigh benefits against risks to make the final determination. Whatever the decision, close clinical monitoring is warranted throughout pregnancy and the postpartum period. Keywords: Schizophrenia; Adverse Effects; Antipsychotic Discontinuation; Pregnancy
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 | 0.004 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".