4.6 Article

Association of Prenatal Exposure to Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers and Infant Birth Weight

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
卷 174, 期 8, 页码 885-892

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwr212

关键词

birth weight; California; cohort studies; environmental exposure; halogenated diphenyl ethers; maternal exposure; maternal-fetal exchange; pregnancy

资金

  1. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences at the National Institutes of Health [PO1 ES009605, RO1 ES015572]
  2. US Environmental Protection Agency [RD 83171001]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) are a class of persistent compounds that have been used as flame retardants in vehicles, household furnishings, and consumer electronics. This study examined whether concentrations of PBDEs in maternal serum during pregnancy were associated with infant birth weight, length, head circumference, and length of gestation. Participants were pregnant women (n = 286) enrolled in the Center for the Health Assessment of Mothers and Children of Salinas (CHAMACOS) Study, a longitudinal cohort study of low-income, predominantly Mexican families living in the Salinas Valley, California. Blood samples were collected near the 26th week of pregnancy in 1999-2000, and concentrations of 10 PBDE congeners (BDE-17, -28, -47, -66, -85, -99, -100, -153, -154, and -183) were measured. Multiple linear regression models were used to investigate the association of lipid-adjusted, log(10)-transformed PBDE concentrations and birth outcome. In adjusted analyses, negative associations with birth weight were seen with BDE-47 (beta = -115 g, 95% confidence interval (CI): -229, -2), BDE-99 (beta = -114 g, 95% CI: -225, -4), and BDE-100 (beta = -122 g, 95% CI: -235, -9). These findings were diminished slightly and were no longer statistically significant when maternal weight gain was included in the models. PBDE congeners were not associated with birth length, head circumference, or gestational duration.

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

4.6
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