Effect of prenatal phthalate exposure on childhood atopic dermatitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The association between prenatal exposure to phthalate and childhood atopic dermatitis (AD) has previously been investigated; however, the results are inconsistent. Objective: We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of birth cohort studies to investigate whether prenatal exposure to phthalate increases the risk of developing AD in children. Methods: We performed an electronic search of medical literature data bases. Studies were critically appraised, and a meta-analysis was performed. Results: Among 129 articles identified, 11 studies met the eligibility criteria. Included studies originated from Europe (n = 5), the United States (n = 4), and Asia ( n = 2). The study sample size ranged from 147 to 1024 mother-child pairs. Quality assessment by using the Newcastle‐Ottawa scale of all the studies had scores of ≥6. A meta-analysis of data from eight selected studies suggested that monobenzyl phthalate (MBzP) exposure was significantly associated with the risk of AD development (odds ratio 1.16 [95% confidence interval, 1.04−1.31]; I 2 = 17.36%). However, AD development was not associated with other phthalate metabolites, such as mono-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, monoethyl phthalate, mono-isobutyl phthalate, mono-n-butyl phthalate, and the sum of di-[2-ethylhexyl] phthalate on the development of AD (all p values were > 0.05). Conclusion: Our meta-analysis suggested that prenatal exposure to phthalates may be associated with the development of childhood AD. However, further research is needed because only MBzP showed statistical significance and the number of articles in the literature is still insufficient.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| 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".