MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3000202265 · doi:10.1111/ppe.12615

Acetaminophen use during pregnancy and the risk of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: A causal association or bias?

2020· review· en· W3000202265 on OpenAlexafffund
Reem Masarwa, Robert W. Platt, Kristian B. Filion

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and Medication Impact
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsConfoundingMedicineMeta-analysisObservational studyAttention deficit hyperactivity disorderRelative riskConfidence intervalPublication biasCochrane LibraryPregnancyPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The association between acetaminophen use during pregnancy and the development of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in the offspring may be due to bias. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to assess the role of potential unmeasured confounding in the estimation of the association between acetaminophen use during pregnancy and the risk of ADHD, through bias analysis. The secondary objective was to assess the roles of selection bias and exposure misclassification. DATA SOURCES: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library up to December 2018. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: We included observational studies examining the association between acetaminophen use during pregnancy and the risk of ADHD. SYNTHESIS: We meta-analysed data across studies, using random-effects model. We conducted a bias analysis to studies that did not adjust for important confounders, to explore systematic errors related to unmeasured confounding, selection bias, and exposure misclassification. RESULTS: = 48%). Sensitivity analysis for unmeasured confounding in this meta-analysis showed that a confounder of 1.69 on the RR scale would reduce to 10% the proportion of studies with a true effect size of RR >1.10. Unmeasured confounding bias analysis decreased the point estimate in five of the seven studies and increased in two studies, suggesting that the observed association could be confounded by parental ADHD. Unadjusted and bias-corrected risk ratios (bcRRs) were: RR = 1.34, bcRR = 1.13; RR = 1.51, bcRR = 1.17; RR = 1.63, bcRR = 1.38; RR = 1.44, bcRR = 1.17; RR = 1.16, bcRR = 1.18; RR = 1.25, bcRR = 1.05; and RR = 0.99, bcRR = 1.18. CONCLUSIONS: Bias analysis suggests that the previously reported association between acetaminophen use during pregnancy and an increased risk of ADHD in the offspring may be due to unmeasured confounding. Our ability to conclude a causal association is limited.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.146
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.368
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.146
Threshold uncertainty score0.771

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1460.368
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.013
Bibliometrics0.0060.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.073
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
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

Citations46
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatric and Perinatal EpidemiologySame topicPregnancy and Medication ImpactFrench-language works237,207