Paternal organic solvent exposure and adverse pregnancy outcomes: A meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Organic solvents are widely used, but conflicting reports exist concerning paternal exposure and adverse pregnancy outcomes. We conducted a meta-analysis to assess the risks of spontaneous abortions (SAs) and major malformations (MMs) after paternal exposure to organic solvents. METHODS: Medline, Toxline, Reprotox, and Embase from 1966 to 2003 were searched. Two independent reviewers searched for cohort and case-control studies in any language on adult human males exposed chronically to any organic solvent. Two non-blinded independent extractors used a standardized form for data extraction; disagreements were resolved through consensus discussion. RESULTS: Forty-seven studies were identified; 32 exclusions left 14 useable studies. Overall random effects odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CI95%) were 1.30 (CI95%: 0.81-2.11, N=1,248) for SA, 1.47 (CI95%: 1.18-1.83, N=384,762) for MMs, 1.86 (CI95%: 1.40-2.46, N=180,242) for any neural tube defect, 2.18 (CI95%: 1.52-3.11, N=107,761) for anencephaly, and 1.59 (CI95%: 0.99-2.56, N=96,517; power=56.3%) for spina bifida. CONCLUSIONS: Paternal exposure to organic solvents is associated with an increased risk for neural tube defects but not SAs.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".