Gestational exposure to endocrine disrupting chemicals in relation to infant birth weight: a Bayesian analysis of the HOME Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pregnant women are exposed to a mixture of endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs). Gestational EDC exposures may be associated with changes in fetal growth that elevates the risk for poor health later in life, but few studies have examined the health effects of simultaneous exposure to multiple chemicals. This study aimed to examine the association of gestational exposure to five chemical classes of potential EDCs: phthalates and bisphenol A, perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), and organochlorine pesticides (OCPs) with infant birth weight. METHODS: Using data from the Health Outcomes and Measures of Environment (HOME) Study, we examined 272 pregnant women enrolled between 2003-2006. EDC concentrations were quantified in blood and urine samples collected at 16 and 26 weeks gestation. We used Bayesian Hierarchical Linear Models (BHLM) to examine the associations between newborn birth weight and 53 EDCs, 2 organochlorine pesticides (OPPs) and 2 heavy metals. RESULTS: For a 10-fold increase in chemical concentration, the mean differences in birth weights (95% credible intervals (CI)) were 1 g (-20, 23) for phthalates, -11 g (-52, 34) for PFAS, 0.2 g (-9, 10) for PCBs, -4 g (-30, 22) for PBDEs, and 7 g (-25, 40) for OCPs. CONCLUSION: Gestational exposure to phthalates, PFAS, PCBs, PBDEs, OCPs or OPPs had null or small associations with birth weight. Gestational OPP, Pb, and PFAS exposures were most strongly associated with lower birth weight.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".