4.6 Article

Relation between ambient air quality and selected birth defects, seven county study, Texas, 1997-2000

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
Volume 162, Issue 3, Pages 238-252

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwi189

Keywords

abnormalities; air pollution; cleft lip; cleft palate; environment and public health; heart defects; congenital

Funding

  1. NIEHS NIH HHS [P30ES10126] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A population-based case-control study investigated the association between maternal exposure to air pollutants, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, sulfur dioxide, and particulate matter < 10 mu m in aerodynamic diameter during weeks 3-8 of pregnancy and the risk of selected cardiac birth defects and oral clefts in livebirths and fetal deaths between 1997 and 2000 in seven Texas counties. Controls were frequency matched to cases on year of birth, vital status, and maternal county of residence at delivery. Stationary monitoring data were used to estimate air pollution exposure. Logistic regression models adjusted for covariates available in the vital record. When the highest quartile of exposure was compared with the lowest, the authors observed positive associations between carbon monoxide and tetralogy of Fallot (odds ratio = 2.04, 95% confidence interval: 1.26, 3.29), particulate matter < 10 mu m in aerodynamic diameter and isolated atrial septal defects (odds ratio = 2.27, 95% confidence interval: 1.43, 3.60), and sulfur dioxide and isolated ventricular septal defects (odds ratio = 2.16, 95% confidence interval: 1.51, 3.09). There were inverse associations between carbon monoxide and isolated atrial septal defects and between ozone and isolated ventricular septal defects. Evidence that air pollution exposure influences the risk of oral clefts was limited. Suggestive results support a previously reported finding of an association between ozone exposure and pulmonary artery and valve defects.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available