Sex Differences in the Behavioural Outcomes of Prenatal Nicotine and Tobacco Exposure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Smoking remains the leading cause of preventable death worldwide. A combination of biological and environmental risk factors make women especially vulnerable to nicotine addiction, making it harder for them to quit smoking. Smoking during pregnancy, therefore, is still a major health concern, with epidemiological data suggesting a role for gestational nicotine exposure in the development of several behavioural disorders. Given there are significant sex-specific behavioural outcomes related to smoking in adolescence and adulthood, it is probable that the behavioural outcomes following gestational nicotine or tobacco exposure are similarly sex-dependent. This is an especially relevant topic as the current landscape of nicotine use shifts toward vaping, a mode of high doses of nicotine delivery that is largely believed to be a safer alternative to cigarettes among the public as well as among pregnant women. Here we review existing clinical and preclinical findings regarding the sex-dependent behavioural outcomes of prenatal nicotine exposure. We also highlight the challenges within this literature, particularly those areas in which further research is necessary to improve consistency within, and between, clinical and preclinical findings.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".