The endocrine disrupting chemicals as possible stillbirth contributors.

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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Purity Is Not the Point: Chemical Toxicity, Childbearing, and Consumer Politics as Care.Catalyst (San Diego, Calif.) · 2020
   Article
2. Fetal biparametric MR imaging in the diagnosis of congenital mesoblastic nephroma.Turkish journal of urology · 2018
   Article
3. Editorial: New Approaches to the Pathogenesis of Sudden Intrauterine Unexplained Death and Sudden Infant Death Syndrome.Frontiers in neurology · 2017
   Article
4. Negative Role of the Environmental Endocrine Disruptors in the Human Neurodevelopment.Frontiers in neurology · 2016
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Commented on by
  Reply.2016
• Comment on
  Obesogens: an emerging threat to public health.2016

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as