Prenatal heavy metal exposure and pediatric asthma, allergic rhinitis, atopic dermatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We review the prevalence of allergic diseases in children across prenatal exposures to heavy metals. METHODS: This systematic review and meta-analysis is registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42023478471). A comprehensive search of PubMed, Web of Science, Medline and Cochrane library was conducted from the database inception until 31 October 2023. The Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS) was used to assess the quality of included studies. We used a random-effects model to summarize the effects from the studies. RESULTS: A total of 16 studies were included, 120,065 mother-child pairs enrolled. The NOS scores indicated that the quality of the literature included in the study was of a high standard. CONCLUSION: The final results indicate that prenatal exposure to Pb increased the incidence of wheeze and Eczema in infants, and exposure to Ni and CD increased the incidence of AD in infants.
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 | 0.006 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.019 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".