ArticleEnvironmental health perspectives2003
An approach to assessment of endocrine disruption in the National Children's Study.
Article in Environmental health perspectives, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Geospatiotemporal and causal inference study of cannabis and other drugs as risk factors for female breast cancer USA 2003-2017.Environmental epigenetics · 2022Article
- Identifying important life stages for monitoring and assessing risks from exposures to environmental contaminants: results of a World Health Organization review.Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP · 2014Review
- Establishment of sustainable health science for future generations: from a hundred years ago to a hundred years in the future.Environmental health and preventive medicine · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this article we consider the importance of assessing endocrine disruption in a large new cohort that has been proposed, the National Children's Study (NCS). We briefly review evidence that endocrine disruption is a potentially important hypothesis for human studies and weigh the need to assess endocrine disruption in the NCS. We note the salient features of earlier, similar cohort studies that serve as reference points for the design of the NCS. Finally, we discuss features of the NCS that would allow or enhance assessment of endocrine disruption, even if endocrine disruption were not a primary hypothesis motivating the study. At this time, the evidence supporting endocrine disruption in humans with background-level exposures is not strong. Thus, a compelling rationale for the NCS will probably need to be based on core hypotheses that focus on other issues. Nonetheless, if properly designed, the NCS could serve as an excellent resource for investigating future hypotheses regarding endocrine disruption.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.