4.4 Article

Prenatal exposure to mirex impairs neurodevelopment at age of 4 years

期刊

NEUROTOXICOLOGY
卷 31, 期 1, 页码 154-160

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuro.2009.09.009

关键词

Prenatal exposure; Mirex; Neurodevelopment; McCarthy Scales of Children's Abilities; Placenta; Spain

资金

  1. Spanish Ministry of Health [FIS PI070252]
  2. Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation (Juan de la Cierva Program-FSE and FPU Program)
  3. EU Commission [Food-CT-2003-506319, FP7-ENV-2007-1-212502]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Some studies have suggested that certain organochlorine (OC) compounds may impair neurodevelopment in animals and humans. The objective of this study was to investigate the association between prenatal exposure to an OC pesticide, mirex, and cognitive development in children at age of 4 years. Methods: A population-based birth cohort in Granada (Spain) recruited between 2000 and 2002 was studied between 2005 and 2006, when the children were 4 years old. Complete data for analyses, including MiFex determination in placentas, were gathered on a random sample of 104 children. A standardized version of the McCarthy Scales of Children's Abilities (MSCA) was used to assess children's Motor and cognitive abilities. Multivariate analyses were performed to evaluate the relation between MSCA scores and prenatal exposure to mirex, adjusting for potential confounders. Results: The presence of mirex in placenta was inversely associated with cognitive development at 4 years of age: children with prenatal exposure to mirex (>= limit of quantification: 26%; median: 1.4 ng/g placenta) showed a decrease of 5.15 points in working memory and of 7.33 points in the quantitative area with respect to children of the same age not prenatally exposed to mirex. Conclusion: The deficit found in intellectual function during early childhood suggests that prenatal exposure to mirex may have a significant impact on school performance. (C) 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据