Prescription opioid use during pregnancy and risk for preterm birth or term low birthweight
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Examine the relationship between prescription opioid analgesic use during pregnancy and preterm birth or term low birthweight. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We analyzed data from the National Birth Defects Prevention Study, a US multisite, population-based study, for births from 1997 to 2011. We defined exposure as self-reported prescription opioid use between one month before conception and the end of pregnancy, and we dichotomized opioid use duration by ≤7 days and >7 days. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We examined the association between opioid use and preterm birth (defined as gestational age <37 weeks) and term low birthweight (defined as <2500 g at gestational age ≥37 weeks). RESULTS: Among 10,491 singleton mother/infant pairs, 470 (4.5 percent) reported opioid use. Among women reporting opioid use, 236 (50 percent) used opioids for > 7 days; codeine (170, 36 percent) and hydrocodone (163, 35 percent) were the most commonly reported opioids. Opioid use was associated with slightly increased risk for preterm birth [adjusted odds ratio, 1.4; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.0, 1.9], particularly with hydrocodone [1.6; 1.0, 2.6], meperidine [2.5; 1.2, 5.2], or morphine [3.0; 1.5, 6.1] use for any duration; however, opioid use was not significantly associated with term low birthweight. CONCLUSIONS: Preterm birth occurred more frequently among infants of women reporting prescription opioid use during pregnancy. However, we could not determine if these risks relate to the drug or to indications for use. Patients who use opioids during pregnancy should be counseled by their practitioners about this and other potential risks associated with opioid use in 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".