Air pollution and fecundability in a North American preconception cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Animal and epidemiologic evidence indicates that air pollution may adversely affect fertility. However, the level of evidence is limited and specific pollutants driving the association are inconsistent across studies. We used data from a web-based preconception cohort study of pregnancy planners enrolled during 2013-2019 (Pregnancy Study Online; PRESTO). Eligible participants self-identified as female, were aged 21-45 years, resided in the United States (U.S.) or Canada, and were trying to conceive without fertility treatments. Participants completed a baseline questionnaire and bi-monthly follow-up questionnaires until conception or 12 months. We analyzed data from 8,747 participants (U.S.: 7,304; Canada: 1,443) who had been trying to conceive for <12 cycles at enrollment. We estimated residential ambient concentrations of particulate matter <2.5 µm (PM2.5), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), and ozone (O3) using validated spatiotemporal models specific to each country. We fit country-specific proportional probabilities regression models to estimate the association between annual average, menstrual cycle-specific, and preconception average pollutant concentrations with fecundability, the per-cycle probability of conception. We calculated fecundability ratios (FRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and adjusted for individual- and neighborhood-level confounders. In the U.S., the FRs for a 5-µg/m3 increase in annual average, cycle-specific, and preconception average PM2.5 concentrations were 0.94 (95% CI: 0.83, 1.08), 1.00 (95% CI: 0.93, 1.07), and 1.00 (95% CI: 0.93, 1.09), respectively. In Canada, the corresponding FRs were 0.92 (95% CI: 0.74, 1.16), 0.97 (95% CI: 0.87, 1.09), and 0.94 (95% CI: 0.80, 1.09), respectively. Likewise, NO2 and O3 concentrations were not strongly associated with fecundability in either country. Neither annual average, menstrual cycle-specific, nor preconception average exposure to ambient PM2.5, NO2, and O3 were appreciably associated with reduced fecundability in this cohort of pregnancy planners.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".