Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30256157›Full record

ReviewEnvironmental health perspectives2018

Infant Dietary Exposures to Environmental Chemicals and Infant/Child Health: A Critical Assessment of the Literature.

Judy S LaKind, Geniece M Lehmann, Matthew H Davis, Erin P Hines, Satori A Marchitti, Cecilia Alcala, Matthew Lorber

Erratum issuedOpen access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Environmental health perspectives, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 25 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 64 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Public health evaluation of PFAS exposures and breastfeeding: a systematic literature review.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2023
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Judy S LaKind1 LaKind Associates, LLC, Catonsville, Maryland, USA.
Geniece M Lehmann3 Office of Research and Development (ORD), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Research Triangle Park , North Carolina, USA.
Matthew H Davis4 Office of Children's Health Protection, U.S. EPA, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
Erin P Hines3 Office of Research and Development (ORD), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Research Triangle Park , North Carolina, USA.
Satori A Marchitti5 Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education (ORISE), ORD, U.S. EPA, Athens, Georgia, USA.
Cecilia Alcala6 Association of Schools and Programs of Public Health (ASPPH), ORD, U.S. EPA, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
Matthew Lorber7 ORD, U.S. EPA, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
Environmental Protection Agency · USAssociation of Schools and Programs of Public Health · USOak Ridge Associated Universities · USUniversity of Maryland, Baltimore · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe benefits of breastfeeding to the infant and mother have been well documented. It is also well known that breast milk contains environmental chemicals, and numerous epidemiological studies have explored relationships between background levels of chemicals in breast milk and health outcomes in infants and children.

objectivesIn this paper, we examine epidemiological literature to address the following question: Are infant exposures to background levels of environmental chemicals in breast milk and formula associated with adverse health effects? We critically review this literature a) to explore whether exposure-outcome associations are observed across studies, and b) to assess the literature quality.

methodsWe reviewed literature identified from electronic literature searches. We explored whether exposure-outcome associations are observed across studies by assessing the quality (using a modified version of a previously published quality assessment tool), consistency, and strengths and weaknesses in the literature. The epidemiological literature included cohorts from several countries and examined infants/children either once or multiple times over weeks to years. Health outcomes included four broad categories: growth and maturation, morbidity, biomarkers, and neurodevelopment.

resultsThe available literature does not provide conclusive evidence of consistent or clinically relevant health consequences to infants exposed to environmental chemicals in breast milk at background levels.

conclusionsIt is clear that more research would better inform our understanding of the potential for health impacts from infant dietary exposures to environmental chemicals. A critical data gap is a lack of research on environmental chemicals in formula and infant/child health outcomes. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP1954.

Indexed as

Child HealthInfant HealthAdolescentChildChild, PreschoolDietary ExposureEnvironmental PollutantsHumansInfantInfant, NewbornEnvironmental Pollutants

Identifiers

PMID30256157
PMCPMC6375563
OpenAlexW2894512426

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.