Association of maternal fish consumption and ω-3 supplement use during pregnancy with child autism-related outcomes: results from a cohort consortium analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Prenatal fish intake is a key source of omega-3 (ω-3) polyunsaturated fatty acids needed for brain development, yet intake is generally low, and studies addressing associations with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and related traits are lacking. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine associations of prenatal fish intake and ω-3 supplement use with both autism diagnosis and broader autism-related traits. METHODS: Participants were drawn from 32 cohorts in the Environmental influences on Child Health Outcomes Cohort Consortium. Children were born between 1999 and 2019 and part of ongoing follow-up with data available for analysis by August 2022. Exposures included self-reported maternal fish intake and ω-3/fish oil supplement use during pregnancy. Outcome measures included parent report of clinician-diagnosed ASD and parent-reported autism-related traits measured by the Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS)-second edition (n = 3939 and v3609 for fish intake analyses, respectively; n = 4537 and n = 3925 for supplement intake analyses, respectively). RESULTS: In adjusted regression models, relative to no fish intake, fish intake during pregnancy was associated with reduced odds of autism diagnosis (odds ratio: 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.77, 0.92), and a modest reduction in raw total SRS scores (β: -1.69; 95% CI: -3.3, -0.08). Estimates were similar across categories of fish consumption from "any" or "less than once per week" to "more than twice per week." For ω-3 supplement use, relative to no use, no significant associations with autism diagnosis were identified, whereas a modest relation with SRS score was suggested (β: 1.98; 95% CI: 0.33, 3.64). CONCLUSIONS: These results extend previous work by suggesting that prenatal fish intake, but not ω-3 supplement use, may be associated with lower likelihood of both autism diagnosis and related traits. Given the low-fish intake in the United States general population and the rising autism prevalence, these findings suggest the need for better public health messaging regarding guidelines on fish intake for pregnant individuals.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".