MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392563222 · doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2024.02.316

Metformin in pregnancy and childhood neurodevelopmental outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2024· review· en· W4392563222 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hannah Gordon, Jessica Atkinson, Stephen Tong, Parinaz Mehdipour, Catherine Cluver, Susan Walker, Anthea Lindquist, Roxanne Hastie

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGestational Diabetes Research and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilMedical Research CouncilAustralian Government
KeywordsMetforminMedicinePregnancyNeurocognitiveOffspringMeta-analysisNeurodevelopmental disorderPediatricsObstetricsCognitionPsychiatryInternal medicineAutismEndocrinologyDiabetes mellitus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine the impact of maternal metformin use during pregnancy on offspring neurodevelopmental outcomes. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science (Core Collection) were searched from inception until July 1, 2023. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies of women who received treatment with metformin at any stage of pregnancy for any indication with neurodevelopmental data available for their offspring were included. Studies without a control group were excluded. Randomized controlled trials, case-control, cohort, and cross-sectional studies were included in the review. METHODS: Studies were screened for inclusion and data were extracted independently by 2 reviewers. Risk of bias was assessed using a modified version of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for nonrandomized studies, and the Risk of Bias 2 tool for randomized trials. RESULTS: A total of 7 studies met the inclusion criteria, including a combined cohort of 14,042 children with 7641 children who were exposed and followed for up to 14 years of age. Metformin use during pregnancy was not associated with neurodevelopmental delay in infancy (relative risk, 1.09; 95% confidence interval, 0.54-2.17; 3 studies; 9668 children) or at ages 3 to 5 years (relative risk, 0.90; 95% confidence interval, 0.56-1.45; 2 studies; 6118 children). When compared with unexposed peers, metformin use during pregnancy was not associated with altered motor scores (mean difference, 0.30; 95% confidence interval, -1.15 to 1.74; 3 studies; 714 children) or cognitive scores (mean difference, -0.45; 95% confidence interval, -1.45 to 0.55; 4 studies; 734 children). Studies that were included were of high quality and deemed to be at low risk of bias. CONCLUSION: In utero exposure to metformin does not seem to be associated with adverse neurodevelopmental outcomes in children up to the age of 14 years. These findings provide reassurance to clinicians and pregnant women considering metformin use during 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 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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0140.028
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 designMeta-analysis
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

Citations22
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and GynecologySame topicGestational Diabetes Research and ManagementFrench-language works237,207