Parental Occupational Exposure to Pesticides and Childhood Brain Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The authors examined the risk of childhood brain cancer in relation to parental exposure to classes of pesticides among 154 children diagnosed with astrocytoma and 158 children diagnosed with primitive neuroectodermal tumors (PNET) in the United States and Canada between 1986 and 1989. Controls were selected by random digit dialing and were individually matched to cases by race, age, and geographic area. Each job in the fathers' work history and the usual occupation of mothers were assigned a probability, intensity, and frequency of exposure to insecticides, herbicides, and agricultural and nonagricultural fungicides. Elevated risks of astrocytoma were found for paternal exposure (ever vs. never) to all four classes of pesticides (odds ratio (OR) = 1.4-1.6). An increased risk of PNET was observed for only herbicides (OR = 1.5). For mothers, odds ratios for astrocytoma were elevated for insecticides, herbicides, and nonagricultural fungicides (OR = 1.3-1.6) but not agricultural fungicides (OR = 1.0). No indication was found of an increased risk for PNET. There was little indication for an association with cumulative and average parental exposure. Most risk estimates were around unity, and exposure-response patterns were absent. Overall, it seems unlikely that parental exposure to pesticides plays an important role in the etiology of childhood brain cancer.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".