Paternal exposure to antiseizure medications and offspring outcomes: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Concerns have recently been raised about risks to the fetus resulting from paternal exposure to antiseizure medications (ASMs). To address these concerns, we conducted a systematic review of the literature to assess neurodevelopmental and anatomical outcomes in offspring born to fathers taking ASMs at the time of conception. METHODS: Electronic searches of MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Embase were conducted to identify human studies published in English that reported on outcomes, comprising neurodevelopmental disorders, major congenital malformations, small-for-gestational age or low birth weight, in offspring of fathers taking ASMs at conception. Quality analysis of included studies was undertaken using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. A narrative synthesis was used to report study findings. RESULTS: Of 923 studies identified by the search and screened by title and abstract, 26 underwent full-text review and 10 met eligibility criteria. There was limited evidence available, but there appeared to be no clear evidence for an adverse impact of paternal ASM use on offspring outcomes. Few isolated adverse findings were not replicated by other investigations. Several methodological limitations prevented meta-analysis, including failure by most studies to report outcomes separately for each individual ASM, heterogeneity in measurement and outcome reporting, and small numbers of monotherapy exposures. CONCLUSIONS: Although there were limited data available, this systematic review provides reassuring evidence that paternal exposure to ASMs at conception is unlikely to pose any major risk of adverse outcomes for the offspring. Further research is needed to examine the relationship between preconception ASM use in males and offspring outcomes at birth and postnatally.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".