Child Neurodevelopmental Outcome and Maternal Occupational Exposure to Solvents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Many women of reproductive age are employed in industries involving exposure to organic solvents. Animal toxicological studies and human case reports demonstrate that high exposure to solvents causes neurodevelopmental toxicity in exposed offspring. Data from occupationally exposed women and their children are few. OBJECTIVE: To compare the cognitive, language, and motor performance and the behavioral achievements of children whose mothers were exposed occupationally to organic solvents during pregnancy with those of a matched unexposed control group. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-two pregnant women occupationally exposed to organic solvents were recruited during pregnancy and followed up. Their offspring (age range, 3-9 years) were tested for cognitive functioning (IQ), language, visual-motor functioning, and behavioral functioning and were compared with a matched unexposed control group that was recruited and tested in a similar manner. Examiners were blinded to the exposure status. RESULTS: Mothers occupationally exposed to organic solvents did not differ significantly from matched controls in demographic variables. After controlling for potential confounding because of maternal IQ and maternal education, children exposed in utero to organic solvents obtained lower scores on subtests of intellectual, language, motor, and neurobehavioral functioning. CONCLUSIONS: In utero exposure to organic solvents is associated with poorer performance on some specific subtle measures of neurocognitive function, language, and behavior. Reducing exposure in pregnancy is merited until more refined risk assessment is possible. Further studies that address exposure to specific solvents, dose, and gestational timing of exposure are needed.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".