MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220764665 · doi:10.1111/apa.16335

Association between caesarean birth and childhood cancer: An age‐lagged approach

2022· article· en· W4220764665 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Sophie Marcoux, Safiya Soullane, Ga Eun Lee, Nathalie Auger

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Paediatrica · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Lymphoblastic Leukemia research
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité de MontréalInstitut National de Santé Publique du Québec
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineObstetricsHazard ratioCancerVaginal deliveryCohort studyPregnancyGynecologyConfidence intervalPediatricsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: We assessed the association between caesarean birth and age-specific risks of childhood cancer. METHODS: We followed a cohort of 1 034 049 children between 2006 and 2020 in Quebec, Canada, from birth until age 14 years. The exposure was caesarean, operative vaginal, or spontaneous vaginal birth. The outcome included haematopoietic or solid tumours. We calculated hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the association between mode of delivery and childhood cancer in age-lagged analyses, adjusted for potential confounders. RESULTS: A total of 249 415 (24.1%) children were born by caesarean and 97 411 (9.4%) by operative vaginal delivery. Compared with spontaneous vaginal birth, caesarean was associated with 1.16 times the risk of any cancer (95% CI 1.04-1.30), 1.12 times the risk of haematopoietic cancer (95% CI 0.92-1.36) and 1.21 times the risk of solid tumours (95% 1.06-1.39). Associations strengthened at 2 years of age and were greatest for lymphoma and sarcoma. Operative vaginal birth was not significantly associated with the risk of cancer. CONCLUSION: Caesarean birth may be associated with selected childhood cancers, including lymphoma and sarcoma early in childhood. The underlying reasons for the associations require further investigation, including whether mucosal dysbiosis or labour hormone exposure explain the excess risk.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.714

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa PaediatricaSame topicAcute Lymphoblastic Leukemia researchFrench-language works237,207