Parental Alcohol Consumption and Childhood Cancers: A Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The etiology of childhood cancers remains generally unknown. Given that the metabolites of alcohol are likely carcinogens and that leukemia, the most frequent childhood cancer, can arise in utero, the study of alcohol consumption as a potential risk factor for the development of childhood cancer is justified. This article summarizes the epidemiological evidence on the association between parental exposure to alcohol and the risk of childhood cancers. To do this, a thorough search of the literature from 1960 to 2003 using the PubMed database was carried out. It yielded 33 case-control studies published between 1982 and 2003, including 13 studies that considered paternal exposure in the preconceptional period. In 10 of the 33 studies at least 1 statistically significant risk increase was reported in relation with parental alcohol consumption; in 7 of these studies the increase was related to maternal consumption, whereas in 3 studies, it was related to paternal consumption. The cancers most often found associated with parental drinking were leukemia, brain tumors, and neuroblastoma. A few studies also reported a protective effect with maternal exposure at modest levels. Inconsistencies in the results and the low risks reported do not suggest an association between childhood cancer and parental consumption of alcohol. However, before reaching any definitive conclusions, methodological issues need to be addressed in future studies, as well as the role of genetic susceptibility. Moreover, subtypes of specific cancers need to be studied separately.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".