Phthalate exposures in a Canadian birth cohort at three months of age: the CHILD study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Exposure to phthalates has been associated with the development of wheeze and asthma. While infants may be exposed via multiple routes, the sources of infant exposure aren’t fully understood. We employed the Canadian Healthy Infant Longitudinal Development (CHILD) Study, a multicentre, longitudinal, population-based birth cohort with 3,300 children to identify sources of phthalate exposures in infants. For the first 1,539 CHILD participants we examined associations between 6 urinary phthalate metabolites, measured at 3 months of age and corrected for specific gravity, with 90 variables characterizing the indoor environment, including furnishings, household care products and personal care products. Univariate, Bivariate, and Tobit regression were used for modeling. We also examined the relationship of urinary phthalates with socio-demographic characteristics and breastfeeding. Overall, there were 32 variables associated with higher concentrations and 20 inverse associations. We found higher urinary phthalates among children whose families used oven cleaners (Mono-n-butyl phthalate (β=7%, 95%CI: 2-15%), Mono-benzyl phthalate (β=15%, 5-26%), and Mono-ethyl phthalate (15%, 5-26%)) and air fresheners (Mono-n-butyl phthalate (4%, 2-10%), Mono-benzyl phthalate (10%, 5-15%), and Mono-ethyl phthalate (10%, 5-17%)), or who heated food in hard plastic (Mono-n-butyl phthalate (32%, 15-48%), Mono-2-ethyl-5-hydroxylhexyl phthalate (29%, 7-51%). Soft vinyl flooring was highly correlated with Mono-benzyl phthalate (58%, 35-91%). Mono-2-ethylhexyl phthalate, Mono-2-ethyl-5-hydroxylhexyl phthalate, and Mono-2-ethyl-5-oxohexyl phthalate concentrations were lower in children who were breastfed. Household income was inversely associated with Mono-2-ethyl-5-oxohexyl phthalate concentrations. Our analysis demonstrated higher levels of phthalate metabolites associated with use of household product and plastics. The identification of these exposures as possible contributors to phthalate body burden in three-month-old children is an important step in exposure categorization and supports efforts to reduce exposure.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".