Adverse reproductive outcomes among male painters with occupational exposure to organic solvents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess the risks of reproductive disorders and birth defects in offspring of male painters with exposure to organic solvents, and to determine the shape of the dose-response relationship. METHODS: Random samples of painters and carpenters were drawn from workers affiliated with the Dutch Trade Union for Construction Workers, the Netherlands, 2001. Information on reproductive outcomes, occupational exposures, and lifestyle habits was retrospectively obtained through self-administered questionnaires filled in by 398 painters exposed to organic solvents in paints, thinners, and cleansers in the period of three months before the last pregnancy, and 302 carpenters with little or no exposure to solvents. A statistical model was used to estimate quantitative exposure measures. RESULTS: Workers employed as painters at three months before pregnancy had an increased risk (odds ratio 6.2, 95% CI 1.4 to 27.9) of congenital malformations in offspring compared to carpenters. There was a positive exposure-response trend with increasing exposure to organic solvents based on quantitative model predicted exposure estimates using toluene as a marker. There was some indication of an increased risk of functional developmental disorders in offspring among painters with intermediate and high model predicted exposure. The risk of low birth weight children seemed to be slightly increased among painters as well. Results for other reproductive outcomes (time to pregnancy, spontaneous abortion, and preterm birth) did not show increased risks. CONCLUSION: This study showed a positive association between paternal occupational exposure to organic solvents and congenital malformations in offspring. However, the small numbers of cases, especially when examining different exposure levels, as well as the self-reported nature of exposure and outcome variables, may hamper interpretation of the results.
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".