ArticleToxics2022
Testing the Limit: Evaluating Drinking Water Arsenic Regulatory Levels Based on Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes in Bangladesh.
Article in Toxics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Arsenic in Drinking Water and Prostate Cancer: A Population-Based Case-Control Study in Northern Chile.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2025Article
- Using transcriptomic signatures to elucidate individual and mixture effects of inorganic arsenic and manganese in human placental trophoblast HTR-8/SVneo cells.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
(1) Background: Arsenic (As) is a common drinking water contaminant that is regulated as a carcinogen. Yet, As is a systemic toxicant and there is considerable epidemiological data showing As adversely impacts reproductive health. This study used data from a birth cohort in Bangladesh (2008−2011) to examine associations between drinking water As levels and reproductive outcomes. (2) Methods: Pregnant individuals (n = 1597) were enrolled at <16 weeks gestation and drinking water As was measured. Participants with live births (n = 1130) were propensity score matched to participants who experienced miscarriage (n = 132), stillbirth (n = 72), preterm birth (n = 243), and neonatal mortality (n = 20). Logistic regression was used to examine drinking water As recommendations of 50, 10, 5, 2.5, and 1 µg/L on the odds of adverse birth outcomes. (3) Results: The odds of miscarriage were higher for pregnant women exposed to drinking water ≥2.5 versus <2.5 µg As/L [adjusted odds ratio (OR) 1.90, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 1.07−3.38)]. (4) Conclusions: These preliminary findings suggest a potential threshold where the odds of miscarriage increases when drinking water As is above 2.5 µg/L. This concentration is below the World Health Organizations and Bangladesh’s drinking water recommendations and supports the re-evaluation of drinking water regulations.
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.