MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406468273 · doi:10.4212/cjhp.3601

Adverse Drug Reactions in Pregnant People with Hypertension and/or Diabetes: Temporal Profile and Associated Factors

2025· article· en· W4406468273 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jéssica Escorel Chaves Cavalcanti, Priscilla Karilline do Vale Bezerra, Gabriela Santana Oliveira, Sarah Dantas Viana Medeiros, Ricardo Ney Cobucci, Rand Randall Martins

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and Medication Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsMedicineDiabetes mellitusIncidence (geometry)Confidence intervalPediatricsOdds ratioProspective cohort studyPharmacovigilanceLogistic regressionCohort studyAdverse effectEmergency medicineInternal medicineEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Pregnant people, especially those with diabetes mellitus or hypertension, are particularly vulnerable to adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Objective: To determine the incidence of and factors associated with ADRs in hospitalized pregnant people with diabetes and/or hypertension. Methods: This prospective cohort study involved pregnant people with diabetes and/or hypertension admitted to a maternity hospital in Natal, Brazil, between August 2019 and July 2022. Data for various patient characteristics and the occurrence of ADRs were collected by means of interviewing patients and searching their medical charts. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify and analyze the association of ADRs with various patient characteristics and other factors. Results: A total of 571 pregnant people met the inclusion criteria. Over the study period, the incidence rate of ADRs was 634.4 (95% confidence interval [CI] 522.7–787.1) per 1000 patient-days, with 123 (21.5%) of the patients experiencing at least 1 incident. ADRs occurred predominately in the first 24 hours, with a marked decrease in frequency to the seventh day of admission. Methyldopa was identified as the cause in 42.1% (8/19) of cases of headache and 39.5% (17/43) of cases of sedation. Systemic corticosteroids were responsible for almost all cases of hyperglycemia (97.0% [32/33]). Blurred vision (82.4% [14/17]) and sedation (14.0% [6/43]) were related to the administration of antiemetics and antinauseants, especially scopolamine. Longer hospitalization time (OR 1.052, 95% CI 1.010–1.097, p = 0.016) and greater number of prescribed medications (OR 1.200, 95% CI 1.099–1.310, p < 0.001) were related to the occurrence of ADRs. Conclusions: In this study, 1 of every 5 hospitalized pregnant people had at least 1 ADR, most often in the first 24 hours, with a decrease in incidence in the following days. Pregnant people with longer hospital stays and a greater number of medications had a higher risk of ADRs. Keywords: adverse drug reaction, high-risk pregnancy, clinical pharmacy service, patient safety RÉSUMÉ Contexte : Les personnes enceintes, en particulier celles qui souffrent de diabète sucré ou d’hypertension, sont particulièrement vulnérables aux effets indésirables des médicaments. Objectif : Déterminer l’incidence des effets indésirables et les facteurs qui y sont associés chez les personnes enceintes hospitalisées et souffrant de diabète et d’hypertension. Méthodologie : Cette étude de cohorte prospective portait sur des personnes enceintes atteintes de diabète ou d’hypertension admises dans une maternité de Natal, au Brésil, entre août 2019 et juillet 2022. Les données relatives à diverses caractéristiques de la patientèle et à la survenue d’effets indésirables ont été recueillies au moyen d’entretiens et de recherches dans les dossiers médicaux de celle-ci. Une régression logistique multivariée a été utilisée pour recenser et analyser l’association des effets indésirables avec diverses caractéristiques de la patientèle et d’autres facteurs. Résultats : Au total, 571 personnes enceintes répondaient aux critères d’inclusion. Au cours de la période d’étude, le taux d’incidence des effets indésirables se chiffrait à 634,4 pour 1000 jours-patients (intervalle de confiance [IC] à 95 % 522,7-787,1), 123 (21,5 %) de la patientèle ayant eu au moins un incident. Les effets indésirables prédominaient dans les 24 premières heures, avec une diminution marquée de la fréquence jusqu’au septième jour d’admission. La méthyldopa a été identifiée comme cause dans 42,1 % (8/19) des cas de céphalées et 39,5 % (17/43) des cas de sédation. Les corticostéroïdes systémiques étaient responsables de presque tous les cas d’hyperglycémie (97,0 % [32/33]). La vision floue (82,4 % [14/17]) et la sédation (14,0 % [6/43]) étaient liées à l’administration d’antiémétiques et d’antinauséeux, en particulier de scopolamine. Une durée d’hospitalisation prolongée (rapport de cotes [RC] 1,052, IC à 95 % 1,010-1,097, p = 0,016) et un plus grand nombre de médicaments prescrits (RC 1,200, IC à 95 % 1,099-1,310, p < 0,001) étaient liés à la survenue d’effets indésirables. Conclusions : Dans cette étude, 1 personne enceinte hospitalisée sur 5 présentait au moins un effet indésirable, le plus souvent dans les 24 premières heures, avec une diminution de l’incidence dans les jours suivants. Les personnes enceintes ayant séjourné plus longtemps à l’hôpital et ayant pris un plus grand nombre de médicaments présentaient un risque plus élevé d’effets indésirables. Mots-clés : réaction indésirable aux médicaments, grossesse à haut risque, service de pharmacie clinique, sécurité des patients

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Hospital PharmacySame topicPregnancy and Medication ImpactFrench-language works237,207