Effects of maternal depression and prenatal SSRI exposure on executive functions and susceptibility to household chaos in 6-year-old children: prospective cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Maternal depressed mood during pregnancy may shape a child's adaptation to their environment and engagement in goal-directed behaviour such as executive functions. Whether everyday household context also alters executive functions in children with prenatal selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) antidepressant exposure remains to be determined. AIMS: To examine the impact of prenatal depressed maternal mood and SSRI exposure on child executive functions and to determine whether these exposures shape a susceptibility to household chaos. METHOD: A prospective cohort study of mothers and their children (118 mother-children dyads (47 SSRI-exposed, 71 non-exposed)) followed from the second trimester to 6 years. Regression models examined relationships between maternal depressed mood and household chaos on maternal report of child executive functions. Competitive-confirmatory regression models examined whether children were susceptible to household chaos or were positively influenced by less chaos. RESULTS: Prenatal SSRI exposure, third-trimester maternal depressed mood and household chaos in a three-way interaction were associated with executive functions within a model of differential susceptibility. When household chaos was low, children of non-prenatally depressed mothers had better executive function than children of prenatally depressed mothers, regardless of whether the mothers were SSRI-treated. However, when household chaos was high, SSRI-exposed children of mothers who were not depressed during pregnancy had poorer executive functions at 6 years of age compared with SSRI-exposed children whose mothers were symptomatic during pregnancy. CONCLUSIONS: The impact of household chaos depended on whether mothers were prenatally depressed and whether mothers were SSRI-treated.
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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".