MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391127046 · doi:10.1088/1748-9326/ad21b2

Association between maternal exposure to environmental endocrine disruptors and the risk of congenital heart diseases in offspring: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2024· review· en· W4391127046 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kai Pan, Jie Yu, Chengxing Wang, Zhen Mao, Yuzhu Xu, Haoke Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Research Letters · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnergy and Environment Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsOffspringEndocrine systemMeta-analysisMedicineAssociation (psychology)Environmental healthPhysiologyPregnancyInternal medicineBiologyPsychologyGeneticsHormone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Congenital heart disease (CHD) is the most common type of congenital malformation and the leading cause of death in newborns. Some observational studies have investigated the relationship between exposure to environmental endocrine disruptors (EEDs) and CHD in pregnant women. However, the findings of epidemiological studies in different countries and regions remain controversial and exhibit significant variations. This meta-analysis aimed to explore the relationship between exposure to EEDs and CHD in pregnant women, hoping to provide some insights into related research in different regions and further demonstrate the relationship between the two. Three databases (PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science) were searched, and 17 studies with 1373 117 participants were selected, including 3 on polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), 5 on pesticides/insecticides, 4 on phthalates, 4 on alkylphenolic compounds, and 7 on heavy metals. The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale was used to evaluate the quality of the studies. Begg’s and Egger’s tests were used to determine the publication bias of the studies, and the I 2 statistics to evaluate the statistical heterogeneity among the studies. The adjusted estimates were pooled using the random-effects and fixed-effects models to explore the association between EEDs and CHD and its subtypes. Maternal exposure to PAHs [odds ratio (OR) = 1.34, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.17–1.53)] (e.g. PAHs and tetralogy of Fallot, septal defects, and conotruncal defects)], pesticides/insecticides (OR = 1.32, 95% CI: 1.20–1.46), alkylphenolic compounds (OR = 1.46, 95% CI: 1.14–1.86), and heavy metals (arsenic, cadmium, mercury, and lead) (OR = 2.09, 95% CI: 1.53–2.86) during pregnancy was positively associated with CHD in offspring. This study found that exposure to EEDs in pregnant women was positively associated with CHD in offspring. These findings are of great significance for researchers to further study the relationship between the two.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.550
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.285 · 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.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Research LettersSame topicEnergy and Environment ImpactsFrench-language works237,207