Residential Proximity to Oil and Gas Development and Mental Health in a North American Preconception Cohort Study: 2013–2023
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives. To evaluate associations between oil and gas development (OGD) and mental health using cross-sectional data from a preconception cohort study, Pregnancy Study Online. Methods. We analyzed baseline data from a prospective cohort of US and Canadian women aged 21 to 45 years who were attempting conception without fertility treatment (2013–2023). We developed residential proximity measures for active OGD during preconception, including distance from nearest site. At baseline, participants completed validated scales for perceived stress (10-item Perceived Stress Scale, PSS) and depressive symptoms (Major Depression Inventory, MDI) and reported psychotropic medication use. We used log-binomial regression and restricted cubic splines to estimate prevalence ratios (PRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results. Among 5725 participants across 37 states and provinces, residence at 2 km versus 20 to 50 km of active OGD was associated with moderate to high perceived stress (PSS ≥ 20 vs < 20: PR = 1.08; 95% CI = 0.98, 1.18), moderate to severe depressive symptoms (MDI ≥ 20 vs < 20: PR = 1.27; 95% CI = 1.11, 1.45), and psychotropic medication use (PR = 1.11; 95% CI = 0.97, 1.28). Conclusions. Among North American pregnancy planners, closer proximity to OGD was associated with adverse preconception mental health symptomatology. ( Am J Public Health. 2024;114(9):923–934. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2024.307730 )
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".