MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3022808302 · doi:10.1016/j.envint.2020.105789

Association of perfluoroalkyl substances with gestational hypertension and preeclampsia in the MIREC study

2020· article· en· W3022808302 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Michael M. Borghese, Mark Walker, Michael Helewa, William D. Fraser, Tye E. Arbuckle

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironment International · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPer- and polyfluoroalkyl substances research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeUniversity of ManitobaOttawa HospitalHealth Canada
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHealth Canada
KeywordsPreeclampsiaMedicineGestational hypertensionObstetricsOdds ratioPregnancyPerfluorooctaneGestational ageSmall for gestational ageBlood pressureLogistic regressionInternal medicineChemistrySulfonateBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) have been linked with a number of developmental, reproductive, hepatic, and cardiovascular health outcomes. However, the evidence for an association between PFAS and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (including gestational hypertension and preeclampsia) is equivocal and warrants further investigation. OBJECTIVES: To examine the relationship between background levels of perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), and perfluorohexane sulfonate (PFHxS) and the development of gestational hypertension or preeclampsia in a Canadian pregnancy cohort. We also explored the potential for effect modification according to fetal sex. METHODS: Maternal plasma samples were collected in the first trimester from participants in the MIREC study and were analyzed for PFOA, PFOS, and PFHxS. Blood pressure was measured during each trimester. Gestational hypertension and preeclampsia were defined using the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada guidelines. Logistic regression models were used to derive adjusted odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for associations between PFAS concentrations (per doubling of concentration as well as according to tertiles) and gestational hypertension or preeclampsia. Linear mixed models were used to examine the association between PFAS concentrations and changes in blood pressure throughout pregnancy. RESULTS: Data from 1739 participants were analyzed. 90% of women were normotensive throughout pregnancy, 7% developed gestational hypertension without preeclampsia, and 3% developed preeclampsia. In the full analyses, neither PFOA nor PFOS were associated with gestational hypertension or preeclampsia. However, each doubling of PFHxS plasma concentration was associated with higher odds of developing preeclampsia (OR = 1.32; 95% CI: 1.03, 1.70). In addition, participants in the highest PFHxS tertile (1.4-40.0 μg/L) had higher odds of developing preeclampsia relative to those in the lowest tertile (OR = 3.06; 95% CI: 1.27, 7.39). In stratified analyses, this effect was only apparent among women carrying a female fetus (OR = 4.90; 95% CI: 1.02, 22.3). However, among women carrying a male fetus, both PFOS and PFHxS were associated with gestational hypertension, but not preeclampsia. Higher plasma concentrations of all three PFAS were associated with increases in diastolic blood pressure throughout pregnancy, and PFOA and PFHxS were also associated with systolic blood pressure. Discrepant findings were similarly revealed in analyses stratified by fetal sex. CONCLUSIONS: Higher levels of PFHxS were associated with the development of preeclampsia, but not gestational hypertension. Neither PFOA nor PFOS were associated with either outcome. However, we show, for the first time, that fetal sex may modify these associations, a finding which warrants replication and further study.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.339
Threshold uncertainty score0.674

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.212 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations78
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironment InternationalSame topicPer- and polyfluoroalkyl substances researchFrench-language works237,207