MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999628093 · doi:10.1136/oem.2004.013797

Haloacetic acids in drinking water and risk for stillbirth

2005· article· en· W1999628093 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Will D. King, Linda Dodds, A C Allen, B. Anthony Armson, Deshayne B. Fell, Carl Nimrod

Bibliographic record

VenueOccupational and Environmental Medicine · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Treatment and Disinfection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaDalhousie UniversityQueen's University
FundersHealth CanadaDalhousie UniversityQueen's UniversityUniversity of Texas Rio Grande Valley
KeywordsHaloacetic acidsEnvironmental healthEnvironmental scienceMedicineWater treatmentEnvironmental engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Trihalomethanes (THMs) occurring in public drinking water sources have been investigated in several epidemiological studies of fetal death and results support a modest association. Other classes of disinfection by-products found in drinking water have not been investigated. AIMS: To investigate the effects of haloacetic acid (HAA) compounds in drinking water on stillbirth risk. METHODS: A population based case-control study was conducted in Nova Scotia and Eastern Ontario, Canada. Estimates of daily exposure to total and specific HAAs were based on household water samples and questionnaire information on water consumption at home and work. RESULTS: The analysis included 112 stillbirth cases and 398 live birth controls. In analysis without adjustment for total THM exposure, a relative risk greater than 2 was observed for an intermediate exposure category for total HAA and dichloroacetic acid measures. After adjustment for total THM exposure, the risk estimates for intermediate exposure categories were diminished, the relative risk associated with the highest category was in the direction of a protective effect, and all confidence intervals included the null value. CONCLUSIONS: No association was observed between HAA exposures and stillbirth risk after controlling for THM exposures.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.821

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.208 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations28
Published2005
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOccupational and Environmental MedicineSame topicWater Treatment and DisinfectionFrench-language works237,207