MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412861668 · doi:10.1016/j.yebeh.2025.110640

Generalized and focal epilepsy and pregnancy, delivery and neonatal outcomes: a retrospective cohort study

2025· article· en· W4412861668 on OpenAlexaff
Noah Margolese, Ahmad Badeghiesh, Haitham Baghlaf, Aaron M. Samuels, Michael H. Dahan

Bibliographic record

VenueEpilepsy & Behavior · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmacological Effects and Toxicity Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpilepsyRetrospective cohort studyMedicinePregnancyPediatricsCohortObstetricsCohort studyPsychiatrySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We previously demonstrated associations between maternal epilepsy and pregnancy outcomes. Now, we seek to determine whether these outcomes differ between generalized and focal epilepsy. A retrospective cohort study was completed using the HCUP-NIS database. Pregnancy outcomes were compared across generalized and focal epilepsy types, as determined via ICD-9 codes. Of 2,596 pregnancies, 1978 women had focal epilepsy and 618 had generalized epilepsy. Focal epilepsy was associated with increased rates of cesarean sections as compared to generalized epilepsy (aOR = 1.27;95 %CI = 1.02-1.57;p = 0.030). Other pregnancy outcomes did not differ significantly, including pregnancy induced hypertension, gestational hypertension, preeclampsia, eclampsia, preeclampsia and eclampsia superimposed on pre-existing hypertension, gestational diabetes mellitus, placenta previa, preterm premature rupture of membranes, preterm delivery, abruptio placenta, chorioamnionitis, operative vaginal delivery, hysterectomy, postpartum hemorrhage, wound complications, maternal death, transfusion, maternal infection, deep venous thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, venous thromboembolism, disseminated intravascular coagulation, small for gestational age, intrauterine fetal demise and congenital anomalies (P > 0.05, all). As compared to generalized epilepsy, focal epilepsy was associated with younger age (p < 0.001), lower income quartile (p = 0.013), tobacco smoking during pregnancy (p = 0.037) and illicit drug use (p < 0.001). Women with focal epilepsy were more likely than those with generalized epilepsy to be covered by Medicaid and less likely to be covered through Medicare or private insurance (p < 0.001). No significant differences were observed regarding other maternal characteristics. Women with focal epilepsy are at a higher risk of delivery through cesarean section than those with generalized epilepsy. The reason why remains unclear. Reassuringly, other pregnancy complications are not increased by generalized as opposed to focal epilepsy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.926

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpilepsy & BehaviorSame topicPharmacological Effects and Toxicity StudiesFrench-language works237,207