ArticleJAMA psychiatry2016
Antipsychotic Use in Pregnancy and the Risk for Congenital Malformations.
Article in JAMA psychiatry, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 78 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
78 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 281 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic Review: Antipsychotic Medication in Pregnancy and Neurodevelopmental Outcomes in Children.Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry · 2026Pooled it
- Antipsychotic drug use during pregnancy and neonatal outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Archives of women's mental health · 2026Pooled it
- Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments 2024 Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Perinatal Mood, Anxiety, and Related Disorders: Guide de pratique 2024 du Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments pour le traitement des troubles de l'humeur, des troubles anxieux et des troubles connexes périnatals.Canadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie · 2025Guideline
- Pooled it
- Neonatal outcomes after in utero exposure to antipsychotics: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European journal of epidemiology · 2024Pooled it
- Is Antipsychotic Drug Use During Pregnancy Associated with Increased Malformation Rates and Worsening of Maternal and Infant Outcomes? A Systematic Review.Current neuropharmacology · 2024Pooled it
- Place of the partial dopamine receptor agonist aripiprazole in the management of schizophrenia in adults: a Delphi consensus study.BMC psychiatry · 2022Pooled it
- [Antipsychotics during pregnancy: a systematic review].Der Nervenarzt · 2021Pooled it
- Zidovudine use in pregnancy and congenital malformations.AIDS (London, England) · 2017Pooled it
- Ethical and Legal Considerations in the Refusal of Antipsychotic Treatment During Pregnancy: A Case Report.Cureus · 2026Article
- Maternal Administration of Aripiprazole Impedes the Appendicular Skeletal Growth of Rat Fetuses: A Teratological and Histomorphometrical Assessment.Biomedicines · 2026Article
- Congenital malformation risk following prenatal antipsychotic exposure: a systematic safety surveillance approach.BMJ mental health · 2026Article
- Clozapine Safety in Pregnancy: A Clinical Study.Schizophrenia bulletin · 2026Article
- Reproductive and Fertility Care of Women with Schizophrenia: A Narrative Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Antipsychotic continuation during pregnancy and risk of postpartum relapse in women with schizophrenia: nationwide register-based study.The British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science · 2025Article
- Review
- Risk of congenital anomalies associated with psychotropic medications: a review of neonatal reports in the FDA adverse event reporting System (FAERS).Archives of women's mental health · 2025Article
- The Developmental Toxicity of Haloperidol on Zebrafish (Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Evaluation of atypical antipsychotics associated rhabdomyolysis using the FDA adverse event reporting system database.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Guideline for pharmacological treatment of schizophrenia 2022.Neuropsychopharmacology reports · 2025Article
18 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
importanceThe frequency of antipsychotic (AP) use during pregnancy has approximately doubled during the last decade. However, little is known about their safety for the developing fetus, and concerns have been raised about a potential association with congenital malformations.
objectiveTo examine the risk for congenital malformations overall and cardiac malformations associated with first-trimester exposure to APs. DESIGN, SETTING, AND
participantsThis nationwide sample of 1 360 101 pregnant women enrolled in Medicaid with a live-born infant constituted the pregnancy cohort nested in the Medicaid Analytic Extract database, which included data from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2010. Participants were enrolled in Medicaid from 3 months before their last menstrual period through at least 1 month after delivery. Relative risks (RRs) were estimated using generalized linear models with fine stratification on the propensity score to control for the underlying psychiatric disorders and other potential confounders. Data were analyzed during 2015. EXPOSURES: Use of APs during the first trimester, the etiologically relevant period for organogenesis. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Major congenital malformations overall and cardiac malformations identified during the first 90 days after delivery.
resultsOf the 1 341 715 pregnancies that met inclusion criteria (mean [SD] age of women, 24.02 [5.77] years), 9258 (0.69%) filled at least 1 prescription for an atypical AP and 733 (0.05%) filled at least 1 prescription for a typical AP during the first trimester. Overall, 32.7 (95% CI, 32.4-33.0) per 1000 births not exposed to APs were diagnosed with congenital malformations compared with 44.5 (95% CI, 40.5-48.9) per 1000 births exposed to atypical and 38.2 (95% CI, 26.6-54.7) per 1000 births exposed to typical APs. Unadjusted analyses suggested an increased risk for malformations overall for atypical APs (RR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.24-1.50) but not for typical APs (RR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.81-1.68). After confounding adjustment, the RR was reduced to 1.05 (95% CI, 0.96-1.16) for atypical APs and 0.90 (95% CI, 0.62-1.31) for typical APs. The findings for cardiac malformations were similar. For the individual agents examined, a small increased risk in overall malformations (RR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.02-1.56) and cardiac malformations (RR, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.88-1.81) was found for risperidone that was independent of measured confounders. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Evidence from this large study suggests that use of APs early in pregnancy generally does not meaningfully increase the risk for congenital malformations overall or cardiac malformations in particular. The small increase in the risk for malformations observed with risperidone requires additional study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.