The association between maternal tobacco smoking during pregnancy and the risk of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in offspring: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Post-publication record
Source: Retraction Watch, joined by DOI. OpenAlex records retraction as is_retracted, a boolean over a state space with at least four values, so it cannot express an expression of concern, a correction or a reinstatement; it reports them as false, which reads as “fine”.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Maternal tobacco smoking during pregnancy is a significant public health concern with potential long-lasting effects on child development. ADHD, a neurodevelopmental disorder characterized by inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity, may be influenced by prenatal nicotine exposure. This systematic review and meta-analysis examine the association between maternal tobacco smoking during pregnancy and the risk of ADHD in offspring. METHODS: Following PRISMA guidelines, we searched databases including PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Central, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, LILACS, SciELO, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED), ERIC, CNKI, HTA Database, Dialnet, EBSCO, LENS, and Google Scholar for studies up to November 1, 2024. We included peer-reviewed studies reporting quantitative effect size estimates for the association between maternal tobacco smoking and ADHD. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). RESULTS: We identified 2,981 articles and included 55 studies (4,016,522 participants) in the analysis. The meta-analysis showed a significant association between maternal tobacco smoking during pregnancy and increased risk of ADHD in offspring (pooled Odds Ratio (OR) = 1.71, 95% CI: 1.55-1.88; P < 0.001). Egger's test indicated no publication bias (p = 0.204), but Begg's test did (p = 0.042). By employing the trim and fill method, the revised OR was estimated to be 1.54 (95% CI: 1.40-1.70; P < 0.001). The OR were 2.37 (95% CI: 1.72-3.28; P < 0.001) in cross-sectional studies, 1.72 (95% CI: 1.49-2.00; P < 0.001) in case-control studies, and 1.53 (95% CI: 1.34-1.74; P < 0.001) in cohort studies. Meta-regression showed study design and study region significantly influenced heterogeneity (P < 0.10). Sensitivity and subgroup analyses confirmed the robustness of these findings. CONCLUSION: This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrate a significant association between maternal tobacco smoking during pregnancy and increased odds of ADHD in offspring. These findings highlight the need for prenatal care guidelines and tobacco smoking cessation programs for pregnant women to reduce ADHD risk and promote optimal neurodevelopmental outcomes. Future research should explore underlying mechanisms and potential confounders further.
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 | 0.013 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.017 | 0.032 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| 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".