Occupational exposure to organic solvents during pregnancy and child behavior from early childhood to adolescence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Organic solvents are used in formulating an extensive range of products for professional use. Animal and human studies suggest that in utero solvent exposure may affect neurodevelopment. Our objective was to assess the association between occupational exposure to solvents during pregnancy and child behavior aged 2-12 years. METHODS: The French mother-child cohort PELAGIE (2002-2006) included 3,421 women recruited in early pregnancy. Occupational exposure to solvents was self-reported. For 459 children, parents used a questionnaire derived from the Child Behavior Checklist and the Preschool Social Behavior Questionnaire to assess their child's behavior, at age 2, and the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire at ages 6 and 12. A cross-lagged structural equation modeling approach was used to assess direct and indirect associations between exposure and child behavior. RESULTS: At age 2, an increased externalizing behavior score was suggested with prenatal exposure to solvents (mean change in standardized score (95%CI): 0.28 (-0.01, 0.57) for occasional exposure and 0.23 (-0.05, 0.51) for regular exposure). At ages 6 and 12, distinct sex-specific patterns were observed: among boys, no association with externalizing behavior was observed, while among girls, an association was seen for both occasional and regular exposure (total effect at age 12: 0.45 (0.06,0.83) and 0.40 (0.03, 0.76), respectively). For both sexes, occasional exposure may be associated with internalizing behavior at ages 6 and 12 (total effect at age 6: 0.37 (0.06, 0.68) and at age 12: 0.27 (-0.08, 0.62)). CONCLUSIONS: Occupational exposure to solvents during pregnancy may impact child behavior through either direct or cumulative effects during childhood; these associations may persist until early adolescence, especially among girls.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".