Measuring the continuation of antidepressant exposure prior to, during, and after pregnancy: A scoping review protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The goal of this scoping review is to summarize how prior studies have measured antidepressant continuation/discontinuation prior to, during, and after pregnancy. INTRODUCTION: Pregnant individuals and healthcare providers are faced with difficult decisions about whether to continue antidepressants in pregnancy due to the historical exclusion of pregnant women from clinical trials and the lack of rigorous evidence to support these decisions. Prior studies examining the effects of pre- and perinatal antidepressant use on perinatal outcomes using observational data have been inconsistent, primarily due to the binary (ever/never) categorization of exposure, which may not accurately reflect real-world use. INCLUSION CRITERIA: The population for this review consists of pregnant individuals. The concept is the measurement of continued preconception, prenatal, and postpartum antidepressant use. We will include human studies (no restrictions on language or geographic location) with the following study designs: cohort studies, cross-sectional studies, case-control studies, and descriptive analyses or spontaneous reports that reference antidepressant use over time. METHODS: We will conduct a scoping review using the JBI (formerly Joanna Briggs Institute) manual for scoping reviews and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews Checklist (PRISMA-ScR). The search strategy will be performed using database-specific nomenclature in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Canada's Drug Agency Grey Matters Guide for grey literature, limiting the final search to publications since 2022 to include contemporary data. Two independent reviewers will 1) screen titles/abstracts/full-texts and 2) extract data. Findings will summarize measurements of antidepressant continuation during the perinatal period, categorizing studies based on the descriptions of timing, duration, adherence, and exposure ascertainment. CONCLUSION: This scoping review will establish the extent to which prior studies have been able to measure continued use to inform a clear definition of continued antidepressant exposure to be used in future studies. Review registration: Open Science Framework https://osf.io/2ewpq.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.112 | 0.090 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.015 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.018 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.057 | 0.016 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".