Maternal Fish Consumption and Infant Birth Size and Gestation: New York State Angler Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The scientific literature poses a perplexing dilemma for pregnant women with respect to the consumption of fish from natural bodies of water. On one hand, fish is a good source of protein, low in fat and a rich source of other nutrients all of which have presumably beneficial effects on developing embryos and fetuses. On the other hand, consumption of fish contaminated with environmental toxicants such as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) has been associated with decrements in gestation and birth size. METHODS: 2,716 infants born between 1986-1991 to participants of the New York State Angler Cohort Study were studied with respect to duration of maternal consumption of contaminated fish from Lake Ontario and its tributaries and gestation and birth size. Hospital delivery records (maternal and newborn) were obtained for 92% of infants for the ascertainment of gestation (weeks), birth size (weight, length, chest, and head circumference) and other known determinants of fetal growth (i.e., maternal parity, history of placental infarction, uterine bleeding, pregnancy loss or cigarette smoking and infant's race, sex and presence of birth defect). Duration of maternal fish consumption prior to the index infant's birth was categorized as: none; 1-2, 3-7, 8+ years, while birth weight (in grams), birth length (in centimeters), and head and chest circumference (in centimeters) were left as continuous variables in multiple linear regression models. Birth size percentiles, ponderal indices and head to chest circumference ratios were computed to further assess proportionality and birth size in relation to gestational age. RESULTS: Analysis of variance failed to identify significant mean differences in gestation or any measure of birth size in relation to duration of maternal lifetime fish consumption. Multiple linear regressions identified gestational age, male sex, number of daily cigarettes, parity and placental infarction, as significant determinants of birth size. CONCLUSIONS: The results support the absence of an adverse relation between Lake Ontario fish consumption and reduced birth size as measured by weight, length and head circumference. Biological determinants and maternal cigarette smoking during pregnancy remain important determinants of birth size.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".