ArticleCommunications medicine2025
Pregnancy, baby, and childhood outcomes from using anti-seizure medication during pregnancy.
Article in Communications medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Scottish medicines in pregnancy programme: supporting the surveillance of medicines use during pregnancy and assessment of associated clinical outcomes.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Article
- Pregnancy, baby, and childhood outcomes from using anti-seizure medication during pregnancy.Communications medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEvidence of the safety of some anti-seizure medicines (ASMs) during pregnancy remains uncertain.
methodsWe conducted a population-based cohort study of singleton pregnancies in Scotland conceived between 01/04/2010-02/07/2023. Exposure was 'any ASM' prescription issued 28 days prior to conception up to pregnancy end. Seven monotherapies were also examined: valproate, topiramate, carbamazepine, lamotrigine, levetiracetam, gabapentin and pregabalin. Unexposed comparators were matched to the exposed on gestational age and year of conception. Pregnancy loss, congenital condition and child development outcomes were compared by exposure status using conditional logistic regression to account for the matched study design.
resultsHere we show pregnancy loss (3175/11,011 pregnancies, 28.8% vs. 24,040/107,889 pregnancies, 22.3%), congenital conditions (230/8370 babies, 2.7% vs. 1693/82,085 babies, 2.1%) and developmental concerns (1270/4890 live births, 26.0% vs. 7658/48,883 live births, 15.7%) are more common following any ASM exposure in pregnancy compared with no ASM exposure in pregnancy. Valproate is strongly associated with pregnancy loss (adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 1.92, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.50-2.47), congenital conditions (aOR: 1.85, 95% CI: 1.06-3.21) and developmental concerns (aOR: 1.43, 95% CI: 1.01-2.03). Pregabalin, gabapentin and any ASM are also associated with pregnancy loss and developmental concerns.
conclusionsOur findings corroborate the associated risks of valproate use and embryo malformations, support the use of lamotrigine and levetiracetam in pregnancy and raise concerns regarding gabapentinoid use in pregnancy.
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.