MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414044164 · doi:10.1002/rfc2.70037

Paternal Influences on Offspring Bone, Muscle and Growth in Childhood and Adulthood: A Systematic Review

2025· article· en· W4414044164 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mia A. Percival, Kara B. Anderson, Julie A. Pasco, Sarah Hosking, Natalie K. Hyde

Bibliographic record

VenueReproductive Female and Child Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBirth, Development, and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDeakin University
KeywordsOffspringCINAHLConfoundingObservational studyPregnancyMeta-analysisEarly childhoodBiobankSystematic review

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Objective There is a growing body of evidence examining the paternal origins of health and disease. This review aimed to systematically search extant literature regarding the relationship between paternal lifestyle and health exposures during early life, conception or pregnancy and offspring childhood and adulthood musculoskeletal, body composition and growth measures. Data Sources The MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and Cochrane Library electronic databases were searched using both subject headings and free‐text terms for the fathers’ exposures and offspring outcomes. All published literature in the English language from each database's inception through to October 2024 was queried. Forward and backwards citation screening of all relevant articles was conducted. Study Eligibility Criteria Experimental and observational studies assessing any paternal exposure during early life, peri/conception or pregnancy, and their association with offspring growth and musculoskeletal health measures in infancy, childhood and adulthood were included. For the purpose of this paper, only papers featuring offspring measures in childhood and adulthood have been discussed. Study Appraisal and Synthesis Methods The extracted data were primarily descriptive and included information on the study design, sample size, paternal exposure, offspring outcome, timeframe of offspring outcome measurement, major findings and the confounding variables included in statistical models. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle–Ottawa tool. The studies were characterised based on the outcome assessed. This study was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews. Results In total, 290 papers met the inclusion criteria of the review, of which 118 reported on offspring outcomes during childhood and adulthood. Some paternal exposures appear to have an association with musculoskeletal and growth measures in offspring during childhood and adulthood. However, there is limited evidence and contradictory findings for many reported paternal exposures. Conclusions This systematic review indicates that some paternal exposures, such as body mass index and smoking, appear to have an association with offspring childhood and adulthood musculoskeletal and growth measures. Further research is required to determine if there are associations with other paternal exposures and whether the reported associations hold true in larger, more robust studies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.004
Bibliometrics0.0050.007
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.280 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReproductive Female and Child HealthSame topicBirth, Development, and HealthFrench-language works237,207