Teratology Society Platform Sessions Abstracts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Effect of 2 -agonists and Inhaled Corticosteroids Used to Treat Asthma in Pregnancy on Fetal Growth.While inadequate control of asthma during pregnancy has been associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes, the effect of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and 2 -agonists on fetal growth is uncertain.In this prospective study we describe the effect of these medications on fetal growth among 679 asthmatic pregnant women (173 used 2 -agonists only and 506 used ICS with or without other medications) and 310 controls recruited in 1998-2003 through the Organization of Teratology Information Services.More women in the 2 -agonist group had BMI >28 (30.1%) compared to women in the ICS group (24.7%) and controls (13.6%);no differences in asthma severity were observed among asthmatics.Women in the 2 -agonist group had a significantly lower proportion of infants = 10 th percentile on birth weight (1.7%) compared to the ICS group (7.1%) and controls (5.2%) (p=0.027).After adjustment for asthma severity, gravidity, parity, ethnicity, smoking, alcohol use, maternal age, and pre-pregnancy BMI, 2 -agonists remained protective for birth weight = 10 th percentile relative to the ICS (OR=0.24;95% CI 0.07; 0.79).When treatment groups were compared to controls, direction of effect remained the same but was not statistically significant ( 2 -agonists: OR=0.36; 95% CI 0.10; 1.29; ICS: OR=1.70; 95% CI 0.91; 3.17).Use of 2agonists in pregnancy is associated with a lower incidence of small for gestational age infants relative to infants prenatally exposed to ICS or born to non-asthmatic controls.The effect could be attributed to induced relative carbohydrate intolerance, altered uteroplacental hemodynamics, or inhibition of the growth hormone axis.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.205 | 0.044 |
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".