ArticleClinical epidemiology2021
Antiemetic Prescription Fills in Pregnancy: A Drug Utilization Study Among 762,437 Pregnancies in Norway.
Article in Clinical epidemiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk of abnormal pregnancy outcomes after using ondansetron during pregnancy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Pooled it
- Effectiveness of auriculotherapy and laser acupuncture in hyperemesis gravidarum: a randomized clinical trial.Revista latino-americana de enfermagem · 2026Trial
- Impact of a primary care pharmacist consultations on pregnant women's medication use: the SafeStart intervention study linked to a national prescription database.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2023Trial
- Use of antiemetics in early pregnancy 2012-2022: A cross-sectional study.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Article
- Dispensing of Antiemetics During Pregnancy in Aotearoa New Zealand, 2005-2020.The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology · 2026Article
- Expanding the OMOP Common Data Model to Support Perinatal Research in Network Studies.Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety · 2025Article
- Attitudes towards the treatment of nausea and vomiting in pregnancy: results from a nationwide online study in Germany.Frontiers in global women's health · 2025Article
- Association between ondansetron use and mortality of patients on mechanical ventilation in the intensive care unit: a retrospective cohort study.Annals of translational medicine · 2023Article
- Ondansetron use in nausea and vomiting during pregnancy: A descriptive analysis of prescription patterns and patient characteristics in UK general practice.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2022Article
- Antiemetic treatment of hyperemesis gravidarum in 1,064 Norwegian women and the impact of European warning on metoclopramide: a retrospective cohort study 2002-2019.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine antiemetic prescription fill patterns during pregnancy in Norway, with special focus on the use of ondansetron and recurrent use in subsequent pregnancies.
methodsWe conducted a population-based registry study based on data from the Medical Birth Registry of Norway linked to the Norwegian Prescription Database for 762,437 pregnancies >12 gestational weeks ending in live or non-live births between 2005 and 2017. Prescription fills of medications used for nausea and vomiting of pregnancy were summarized in treatment pathways to determine drug utilization patterns. Logistic regression analyses were used to estimate associations between maternal and pregnancy characteristics and antiemetic prescription fills.
resultsThe prescription fill rate for antiemetic medication during pregnancy was 7.6%. However, prescription fill rates were 35.5% in the second pregnancy after filling an antiemetic prescription in the first pregnancy and 53.5% for women who filled antiemetic prescriptions in the previous 2 pregnancies. Among pregnancies with antiemetic prescription fills, 62.2% were dispensed metoclopramide, 28.2% meclizine, and 17.2% promethazine. First-line treatment started with monotherapy in 97.4% of these pregnancies, which was the only treatment received in 78.7%. Prescriptions for ondansetron were filled in 0.3% of pregnancies, with 76.9% being initially filled in the first trimester. Ondansetron as first-line prescription medication and/or use in the first trimester was associated with proxies for more severe nausea and vomiting of pregnancy, including a diagnosis of hyperemesis gravidarum, multiple gestations, a higher obstetric comorbidity index, and concomitant use of medication for gastroesophageal reflux disease and nervous system medications. Women who filled an antiemetic prescription in their first pregnancy were less likely to have subsequent pregnancies than women who did not fill an antiemetic prescription in their first pregnancy (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.90-0.96).
conclusionComplex patterns of antiemetic prescription fills in pregnancy may mirror the challenge of optimal management of nausea and vomiting of pregnancy in clinical practice, especially for women with severe symptoms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.