Maternal lead exposure and the secondary sex ratio
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A reduction in the secondary sex ratio may be associated with exposure to environmental toxicants. Little data exists relating this outcome to lead exposure, a well-known reproductive toxicant. METHODS: We studied 1980 women having singleton births from 1994 to 1995 and from 1997 to 2001 who participated in a cohort study of lead exposure and infant outcomes in Mexico City. Levels of lead were measured in maternal and cord blood using graphite furnace atomic absorption spectroscopy, and levels of lead in maternal patella and tibia bone (a reflection of cumulative exposure) were measured using noninvasive K-X-ray fluorescence measurements. Using logistic regression models, we evaluated the relations of these measures to secondary sex ratio in the offspring, adjusting for maternal age, parity and year of infants' birth. RESULTS: We found no consistent association between any of the lead measures and secondary sex ratio. Results were unchanged when we adjusted for infants' year of birth, maternal age and parity. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a large sample size and the use of sensitive biomarkers, we did not find evidence that maternal and fetal lead exposure is associated with a lower secondary sex ratio among newborns.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".