Antidepressants use during pregnancy and child psychomotor, cognitive and language development at 2 years of age—Results from the 3D Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Approximately 5.5% of pregnant women take antidepressants. Studies on prenatal exposure to antidepressants reported no association with child cognition, and inconsistent results with motor function and language development. A limitation has been the failure to adjust for prenatal maternal distress. Objectives: Assess the associations between prenatal exposure to antidepressants and child development at age two, while adjusting for maternal depressive symptoms and stress during pregnancy. Explore indirect effects through birth complications and consider sex-specific associations. Methods: This is an ancillary study of the 3D (Design Develop, Discover) Study initiated during pregnancy. Data on antidepressants were collected through medication logs spanning the entire pregnancy. Depressive symptoms and stress were assessed during pregnancy by self-reported questionnaires, motor and cognitive development with the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development (BSID-III), and language development with the MacArthur Communicative Development Inventories at age 2. Multiple linear regressions were used to assess the associations between exposure and developmental outcomes. Mediation models were used to assess indirect effects. Interaction terms were introduced to assess sex-specific associations. Results: 1,489 mother-child dyads were included, of whom 61 (4.1%) reported prenatal antidepressant use. Prenatal exposure was negatively associated with motor development (B = −0.91, 95% CI -1.73, −0.09 for fine motor, B = −0.89, 95% CI -1.81, 0.02 for gross motor), but not with cognitive (B = −0.53, 95% CI -1.82, 0.72) and language (B = 4.13, 95% CI -3.72, 11.89) development. Adjusting for maternal prenatal distress only slightly modified these associations. No indirect effect or differential effect according to child sex were found. Conclusion: This study supports evidence of a negative association between prenatal exposure to antidepressants and motor development at age two, after adjusting for maternal distress, but the effect size remains very small, with about only one BSID-III point lower in average.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".