Association between gestational exposure and risk of orofacial clefts: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background The occurrence of orofacial Clefts (OFCs) is a congenital disease caused by many factors. According to recent studies, air pollution has a strong correlation with the occurrence of OFCs. However, there are still some controversies about the current research results, and there is no relevant research to review the latest results in recent years. Objective In this paper, the authors conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the correlation between ambient air pollution and the occurrence of neonatal OFCs deformity. Methods We searched Pubmed, Web of science, and Embase databases from the establishment of the database to May 2023. We included observational studies on the relationship between prenatal exposure to fine particulate matter 2.5 (PM2.5), fine particulate matter 10 (PM10), sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), ozone (O3), carbon monoxide (CO) and the risk of cleft lip (CL), cleft palate (CP), cleft lip with or without palate (CL/P). the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale (NOS) was used to evaluate the quality of the literature. Funnel plot and Egger’s regression were used to verify the publication bias. Random effect model or fixed effect model was used to estimate the combined relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (95%CI). Results A total of eleven studies were included in this study, including four cohort studies and seven case-control studies, including 22,453 cases of OFCs. Ten studies had low risk of bias and only one study had high risk of bias. Three studies reported that PM 2.5 was positively correlated with CL and CP, with a combined RR and 95%CI of 1.287(1.174,1.411) and 1.267 (1.105,1.454). Two studies reported a positive correlation between O 3 and CL, with a combined RR and 95%CI of 1.132(1.047,1.225). Two studies reported a positive correlation between PM 10 and CL, with a combined RR and 95%CI of 1.108 (1.017,1.206). No association was found between SO 2 , CO, NO 2 exposure during pregnancy and the risk of OFCs. Conclusion The results of this study showed that there was a significant statistical correlation between exposure to PM 10 , PM 2.5 , O 3 and the risk of OFCs in the second month of pregnancy. Exposure assessment, research methods and mechanisms need to be further explored.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 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".