ArticleBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2026
Use of antiemetics in early pregnancy 2012-2022: A cross-sectional study.
Article in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimNausea and vomiting in pregnancy impact quality of life, yet many pregnant women feel dismissed by healthcare professionals, despite the safety of first-line antiemetic treatments for both mother and fetus. Therefore, this study aims to describe the prevalence of patient-reported antiemetic use in early pregnancy in Copenhagen, Denmark, the changes in use over two time periods, and the maternal characteristics of users and non-users.
methodsWe analysed patient-reported data on antiemetic use during early pregnancy and maternal characteristics from the Copenhagen Pregnancy Cohort (2012-2022). Descriptive statistics were applied to assess the prevalence, changes in use over two time periods and differences between users and non-users.
resultsAmong 40 856 pregnancies, 1.0% (n = 412) reported using antiemetics in early pregnancy. Metoclopramide was the most used, reported by 0.2% (n = 93). The number of pregnancies with patient-reported antiemetic use doubled from 0.7% in 2012-2017 to 1.4% in 2018-2022. Among users, 83.3% received monotherapy, and 74.1% used antiemetics daily. Compared with non-users, a significantly higher proportion of antiemetic users scored <50 on the World Health Organization Five Well-Being Index (66.6% vs. 20.5%, p < .001) and to a higher extent reported sick leave (68.0% vs. 14.1%, p < .001).
conclusionWe found a low but rising prevalence of antiemetic use in early pregnancy, and the treatment often deviated from clinical guidelines. Antiemetic users differed from non-users on several maternal characteristics, with a higher proportion reporting somatic and psychiatric disorders, as well as poorer mental well-being, despite antiemetic treatment.
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.