Concurrent Opioid and Psychotropic Drug Use During Pregnancy: Descriptive Study from Two Canadian Provinces
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ObjectivesThis study aims to describe the patterns of concurrent opioid and psychotropic drug use (CU) during pregnancy and the characteristics of the mothers dispensed these drugs. MethodsPregnancies between 2000-2020 were identified using administrative data from Manitoba and British Columbia, Canada. Prenatal opioid and psychotropic drug dispensations were assessed, and exposure groups created based on the number of dispensations within each drug category. Descriptive statistics are reported. ResultsApproximately 1.4% of 1,040,021 pregnancies involved CU. Odds of CU were greater for 2+ opioid pregnancies compared to pregnancies with only 1 opioid (OR=4.05). Among CU pregnancies, it was more likely for 2+ types of psychotropics to be dispensed for those involving 2+ opioids compared to 1 (OR=2.23). Percent of CU pregnancies did not change over time, while opioid pregnancies decreased, and psychotropic pregnancies increased. Average morphine equivalent dose of opioids/pregnancy was higher in CU than opioid only pregnancies. Compared to mothers without exposure, CU exposed mothers were of similar age, more likely to live rurally, in lower income areas, and have lower care continuity. ConclusionCU pregnancies remained stable over time. It was more likely for mothers dispensed 2+ opioids to be CU than mothers dispensed only 1 opioid, and more likely for CU mothers dispensed 2+ opioids to be dispensed 2+ psychotropic types. Overall strength of opioids was higher for CU mothers compared to opioid only exposed mothers. ImplicationsStudies measuring the impact of CU on maternal and child outcomes should be conducted to inform safe prescribing practices.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".