MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7133107323

The safety of atypical antipsychotics in pregnancy

2004· dissertation· W7133107323 on OpenAlexaff
Kathleen Danielle McKenna

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2004
Typedissertation
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
Canadian institutionsCanadian Wood CouncilBibliographical Society of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPregnancyObservational studyRetrospective cohort studyIntervention (counseling)Folic acidGestationAntipsychotic
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Three studies were conducted. (1) A retrospective review of the Motherisk Clinic appointments determined that there was an increase in the proportion of appointments for antipsychotics each year since the introduction of atypicals. (2) A pilot intervention study examining the feasibility of counselling women on antipsychotics to take 5mg folic acid while planning their pregnancies determined that high dose folate may not be required by all women, although counselling appeared to be successful. (3) A prospective, observational study comparing women taking atypical antipsychotics to women with non-teratognic exposures was conducted, determining if gestational exposure increased the risk for major malformations. 105 exposed pregnancies (39 olanzapine, 40 risperidone, 24 quetiapine, 6 clozapine---some had multiple exposures), resulted in 78 live births, 10 spontaneous abortions, 4 stillbirths, 3 ectopic and 10 terminations (1 major malformation---pregnancy terminated). These preliminary data suggest that atypical antipsychotics are not major teratogens.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.349 · 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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace→Same topicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum→French-language works237,207→