Paternal preconception modifiable risk factors for adverse pregnancy and offspring outcomes: a review of contemporary evidence from observational studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background The preconception period represents transgenerational opportunities to optimize modifiable risk factors associated with both short and long-term adverse health outcomes for women, men, and children. As such, preconception care is recommended to couples during this time to enable them to optimise their health in preparation for pregnancy. Historically, preconception research predominately focuses on maternal modifiable risks and health behaviours associated with pregnancy and offspring outcomes; limited attention has been given to inform paternal preconception health risks and outcomes. This systematic review aims to advance paternal preconception research by synthesising the current evidence on modifiable paternal preconception health behaviours and risk factors to identify associations with pregnancy and/or offspring outcomes. Methods Medline, Embase, Maternity and Infant care, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Scopus, and ISI Proceedings were searched on the 5th of January 2023, a date limit was set [2012–2023] in each database. A Google Scholar search was also conducted identifying all other relevant papers. Studies were included if they were observational, reporting associations of modifiable risk factors in the preconception period among males (e.g., identified as reproductive partners of pregnant women and/or fathers of offspring for which outcomes were reported) with adverse pregnancy and offspring outcomes. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. Exposure and outcome heterogeneity precluded meta-analysis, and results were summarised in tables. Results This review identified 56 cohort and nine case control studies. Studies reported on a range of risk factors and/or health behaviours including paternal body composition (n = 25), alcohol intake (n = 6), cannabis use (n = 5), physical activity (n = 2), smoking (n = 20), stress (n = 3) and nutrition (n = 13). Outcomes included fecundability, IVF/ISCI live birth, offspring weight, body composition/BMI, asthma, lung function, leukemia, preterm birth, and behavioural issues. Despite the limited number of studies and substantial heterogeneity in reporting, results of studies assessed as good quality showed that paternal smoking may increase the risk of birth defects and higher paternal BMI was associated with higher offspring birthweight. Conclusion The current evidence demonstrates a role of paternal preconception health in influencing outcomes related to pregnancy success and offspring health. The evidence is however limited and heterogenous, and further high-quality research is needed to inform clinical preconception care guidelines to support men and couples to prepare for a health pregnancy and child.
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 | 0.019 | 0.097 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".