Dietary fluoride intake during pregnancy and neurodevelopment in toddlers: A prospective study in the progress cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Foods and beverages provide a source of fluoride exposure in Mexico. While high fluoride concentrations are neurotoxic, recent research suggests that exposures within the optimal range may also pose a risk to the developing brain. This prospective study examined whether dietary fluoride intake during pregnancy is associated with toddlers' neurodevelopment in 103 mother-child pairs from the PROGRESS cohort in Mexico City. Food and beverage fluoride intake was assessed in trimesters 2 and 3 using a food frequency questionnaire and Mexican tables of fluoride content. We used the Bayley-III to evaluate cognitive, motor, and language outcomes at 12 and 24 months of age. Adjusted linear regression models were generated for each neurodevelopment assessment time point (12 and 24 months). Mixed-effects models were used to consider a repeated measurement approach. Interactions between maternal fluoride intake and child sex on neurodevelopmental outcomes were tested. Median (IQR) dietary fluoride intake during pregnancy was 1.01 mg/d (0.73, 1.32). Maternal fluoride intake was not associated with cognitive, language, or motor outcomes collapsing across boys and girls. However, child sex modified the association between maternal fluoride intake and cognitive outcome (p interaction term = 0.06). A 0.5 mg/day increase in overall dietary fluoride intake was associated with a 3.50-point lower cognitive outcome in 24-month old boys (95 % CI: -6.58, -0.42); there was no statistical association with girls (β = 0.07, 95 % CI: -2.37, 2.51), nor on the cognitive outcome at 12-months of age. Averaging across the 12- and 24-month cognitive outcomes using mixed-effects models revealed a similar association: a 0.5 mg/day increase in overall dietary fluoride intake was associated with a 3.46-point lower cognitive outcome in boys (95 % CI: -6.23, -0.70). These findings suggest that the development of nonverbal abilities in males may be more vulnerable to prenatal fluoride exposure than language or motor abilities, even at levels within the recommended intake range.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".