Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30689546›Full record

ReviewReproduction (Cambridge, England)2019

Do prenatal exposures pose a real threat to ovarian function? Bisphenol A as a case study.

Hannah Mathew, Shruthi Mahalingaiah

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Reproduction (Cambridge, England), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Hannah MathewCircle Health Diabetes and Endocrine Center, Dracut, Massachusetts, USA.
Shruthi MahalingaiahDepartment of Epidemiology, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

Funding

REPRODUCTIVE SCIENTIST TRAINING PROGRAMK12HD000849 · NICHD · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI Danny J Schust · 1988 to 2026
$33.2M
NICHD NIH HHS K12 HD000849NIEHS NIH HHS L30 ES023231
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Fetal development represents a time of potential vulnerability due to rapid cell division, organ development and limited fetal kidney/liver activity for detoxification and metabolism of exposures. Health effects of prenatal toxicant exposure have previously been described, but there is little cohesive evidence surrounding effects on ovarian function. Using bisphenol A (BPA) as a case study, we seek to examine whether a prominent prenatal environmental exposure can pose a real threat to human ovarian function. To do so, we broadly review human oogenesis and menstrual cycle biology. We then present available literature addressing prenatal bisphenol A and diverse outcomes at the level of the ovary. We highlight relevant human cohorts and mammalian models to review the existing data on prenatal exposures and ovarian disruption. Doing so suggests that while current exposures to BPA have not shown marked or consistent results, there is data sufficient to raise concerns regarding ovarian function. Challenges in the examination of this question suggest the need for additional models and pathways by which to expand these examinations in humans.

Indexed as

AnimalsBenzhydryl CompoundsBisphenol A CompoundsEndocrine DisruptorsEnvironmental ExposureEnvironmental PollutantsFemaleFetal DevelopmentHumansOvaryPhenolsPregnancyPrenatal Exposure Delayed EffectsBenzhydryl Compoundsbisphenol ABisphenol A CompoundsEndocrine DisruptorsEnvironmental PollutantsPhenols

Identifiers

PMID30689546
PMCPMC6450087

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.