Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2020 Oct 1.
Published in final edited form as: Fertil Steril. 2016 Aug 25;106(4):795–819. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.07.1099

TABLE 3.

Endpoints assessed.

Endpoint Exposure type Publication year First author Study location Health effect (effect/no effect) Results Level of confidence Level of evidence
Birth outcomes associated with maternal exposure
 Preterm birth
  Preterm birth Residential 2002a Yang (30) Taiwan No effect OR 1.03(95% CI, 0.94–1.13) Moderate Inadequate
  Preterm birth Residential 2015 Stacy (35) USA No effect OR ≈ 1.0(95% CI, crossing 1) (data presented in figure, no actual number) for fourth quartile vs. first quartile exposure Moderate Inadequate
  Preterm birth Residential 2016 Casey (29) USA Effect OR 1.9(95% CI, 1.2–2.9) for fourth quartile vs. first quartile exposure High High
  Preterm birth Residential 2001a Lin (25) Taiwan Effect OR 1.41 (95% CI, 1.08–1.82) Moderate Moderate
  Preterm birth Residential 2003 Tsai (23) Taiwan Effect OR 1.11 (95% CI, 1.02–1.21) Moderate Moderate
  Preterm birth Residential 2002b Yang (24) Taiwan Effect OR 1.18 (95% CI, 1.04–1.34) Moderate Moderate
  Preterm birth Residential 2004 Yang (26) Taiwan Effect OR 1.14(95% CI, 1.01–1.28) Moderate Moderate
  Preterm birth Residential 2014 McKenzie (32) USA Effect OR 0.91 (95% CI, 0.85–0.98) High High
 Miscarriage
  Miscarriage Residential 1988 Axelsson (27) Sweden No effect OR 1.15(95% CI, 0.75–1.76) Moderate Inadequate
  Miscarriage Residential 2002 Sebastian (34) Ecuador Effect OR 2.47 (95% CI, 1.61–3.79) High High
  Miscarriage Occupational 1998 Xu (36) China Effect OR 2.7 (95% CI, 1.8–3.9) High High
  Miscarriage Occupational 1989 Axelsson (28) Sweden Effect Observed/expected = 3, P<.05 Very low NA
 Stillbirth
  Stillbirth Residential 2002 Sebastian (34) Ecuador No effect OR 0.85 (95% CI, 0.35–2.05) Low Inadequate
  Stillbirth Residential 2002 Oliveira (33) Brazil No effect OR 0.78 (95% CI, 0.22–2.72) P=.659 Low Inadequate
 Birth weight
  Low birth weight (term) Residential 2002a Yang (39) Taiwan No effect OR 1.07(95% CI, 0.95–1.22) Moderate Inadequate
  Low birth weight Residential 2002 Oliveira (33) Brazil No effect OR 1.42 (95% CI, 0.87–2.31) Moderate Inadequate
  Birth weight (term) Residential 2016 Casey (29) USA No effect Difference in mean: −20 g (95% CI, −56–16) for fourth quartile vs. first quartile exposure Moderate Inadequate
  Birth weight Residential 1988 Axelsson (27) Sweden No effect Mean ± SD: 3,464 ±507 vs. 3,405 ± 581; difference in mean: 59 g, P>.05 for first baby Moderate Inadequate
  Low birth weight (term) Residential 2001b Lin (31) Taiwan Effect OR 1.77(95% CI, 1.0–3.1) Moderate Moderate
  Low birth weight (term) Residential 2014 McKenzie (32) USA Effect OR 0.9 (95% CI, 0.8–1.0) for high exposure vs. reference Moderate Moderate
  Low birth weight Residential 1988 Axelsson (27) Sweden Effect exposed area: observed/expected = 0.66 (95% CI, 0.44, 0.94) Moderate Moderate
  Birth weight Residential 2015 Stacy (35) USA Effect 3,323.1 ± 558.2 vs. 3,343.9 ± 543.9 (difference in mean: −20.8g) P=.02 for fourth quartile vs. first quartile exposure Moderate Moderate
  Birth weight (small for gestational age) Residential 2015 Stacy (35) USA Effect OR 1.34(95% CI, 1.10–1.63) for fourth quartile vs. first quartile exposure Moderate Moderate
  Birth weight Occupational 1989 Axelsson (28) Sweden Effect No statistical conclusion Very low NA
 Birth Defects
  Birth defects (not specified) Residential 2002 Oliveira (33) Brazil No effect OR 1.08 (95% CI, 0.30–3.88) Low Inadequate
  Birth defects (oral clefts) Residential 2014 McKenzie (32) USA No effect OR 0.82 (95% CI, 0.55–1.2) for high exposure vs. reference Moderate Inadequate
  Birth defects (congenital heart defect) Residential 2014 McKenzie (32) USA Effect OR 1.3 (95% CI, 1.2–1.5) for high exposure vs. reference Moderate Moderate
  Birth defects (neural tube defects) Residential 2014 McKenzie (32) USA Effect OR 2.0 (95% CI, 1.0–3.9) for high exposure vs. reference Moderate Moderate
  Birth defects (oral clefts) 2006 Chevrier(30) France Effect OR 3.64 (95% CI, 1.5–8.8) Moderate NA
  Birth defects (not specified) Residential 1988 Axelsson (27) Sweden Effect Observed/expected = 0.68 based on registry of congenital malformation, observed/expected = 0.79 based on medical birth registry Very low NA
 Sex ratio
  Sex ratio Residential 2000a Yang (37) Taiwan No effect Not significant (Z scores for individual year of a total of 26 y were listed in table) Moderate Inadequate
  Sex ratio Residential 2000b Yang (24) Taiwan Effect Male/female = 109.3 (Z=2.96, P=.003) Moderate Moderate
Semen quality, fertility, and birth outcomes associated with adult paternal exposures
 Sperm and Fertility
  Sperm concentration Occupational 1985 Rosenberg (40) Unknown No effect Unexposed = 80.8 mill/mL; exposed = 66.9 mill/mL: P=.16 Low Inadequate
  Sperm concentration Occupational 1997 Khalifa (42) Saudi Arabia Effect During employment = 0.02B mill/mL to 3.2 mill/mL; after employment = 12 mill/mL to 20.6 mill/mL Very low NA
  Sperm concentration Occupational 2001 Wang (41) China Effect Control = 60.07 mill/mL, exposed = 52.52 mill/mL Moderate Moderate
  Sperm count Occupational 2001 Wang (41) China Effect Control = 152 mill/ejac, exposed = 127.02 mill/ejac Moderate Moderate
  Sperm motility Occupational 1997 Khalifa (42) Saudi Arabia Effect During employment: rapid = 0–15, sluggish = 0–15%; after employment: rapid = 30–40, sluggish = 5–15% Very low NA
  Sperm motility Occupational 2001 Wang (41) China Effect Control = 2.41, scale, exposed = 2.02 (P<.05) Moderate Moderate
  Sperm motility Experimental 2013 Mandani (43) Unknown Effect Control = 76%, 0.3 ppm = 2.2%(P<.001) High High
  Sperm motility Experimental 2013 Mandani (43) Unknown Effect Control = 76%, 0.05 ppm = 52%(P<.01) High High
  Sperm viability Occupational 2001 Wang (41) China No effect Control = 61.44%, Exposed = 63.41 % (P>.05) Moderate Inadequate
  Sperm viability Occupational 2013 Mandani (43) Unknown Effect Control = 59%, 0.05 ppm = 49% High High
  Sperm viability Occupational 2013 Mandani (43) Unknown Effect Control = 60%, 0.05 ppm = 52% (P<.01) High High
  DNA damage, intact DNA Occupational 2013 Mandani (43) Unknown Effect Control = 86.5%, phenol-hydroquinone = 47.9% (P<.001) High High
  DNA damage, denatured SS DNA Occupational 2013 Mandani (43) Unknown Effect Control = 14.5%, phenol-hydroquinone = 63.3% (P<.001) High High
  DNA damage, effective DNA Occupational 2013 Mandani (43) Unknown Effect Control = 73.5%, phenol-hydroquinone = 40.5% (P<.001) High High
  DNA damage, intact DNA Occupational 2013 Mandani (43) Unknown Effect Control = 86.5%, catechol = 55.3% (P<.001) High High
  DNA damage, denatured SS DNA Occupational 2013 Mandani (43) Unknown Effect Control = 14.5%, catechol = 44.7% (P<.001) High High
  DNA damage, effective DNA Occupational 2013 Mandani (43) Unknown Effect Control = 73.5%, catechol = 47% (P<.001) High High
  Sperm morphology Occupational 1985 Rosenberg (40) Unknown No effect Unexposed = 49.1%; exposed = 44.5% (P=.94) Low Inadequate
  Sperm morphology Occupational 1997 Khalifa (42) Saudi Arabia Effect During employment = 10–90%; after employment = 10–35% Very low NA
  Fertility Occupational 1999 Bull (44) Unknown No effect FR 0.89 (95% CI, 0.61–1.29) Low Inadequate
 Paternal birth outcomes
  Miscarriages Occupational 1999 Bull (44) Unknown No effect OR 1.1 (95% CI, 0.4–3.1) Low Inadequate
OR 1.4 (95% CI, 0.6–3.2)
  Birth defects Occupational 2012 Desrosiers (45) USA Effect OR 2 (95% CI, 0.8–5.1) Low Low
  Birth defects Occupational 2012 Desrosiers (45) USA Effect OR 2.8 (95% CI, 0.9–9.1) Low Low
  Birth defects Occupational 2012 Desrosiers (45) USA Effect OR 2.6 (95% CI, 1.1–6.5) Low Low
  Birth defects Occupational 2012 Desrosiers (45) USA Effect OR 1.6(95% CI, 1.0–2.4) Low Low
  Childhood cancer Occupational 1987 Johnson (46) USA No effect OR 2.7 (95% CI, 0.9–7.8) Very low NA
Reproductive cancer
 Prostate cancer
  Prostate cancer Residential 1984 Kaldor (49) USA Effect Trend (P=.002) for increasing prostate cancer incidence rates with areas of increasing exposure Moderate Moderate
  Prostate cancer Residential 1989 Schechter(52) Canada No effect SIR 1.76 (95% CI, 0.84–4.38) Very low NA
  Prostate cancer Occupational 2006 Rybicki (48) USA No effect OR 1.12 (95% CI, 0.73–1.73); P=.61 Low Inadequate
  Prostate cancer Occupational 2006 Rybicki (48) USA No effect OR 0.74 (95% CI, 0.48–1.13); P=.16 Low Inadequate
  Prostate cancer Occupational 1991 Christie (47) Australia No effect SIR 1.0 (95% CI, 0.4–1.9) Low Inadequate
  Prostate cancer Occupational 2004 Gun (22) Australia Effect SIR 1.19(95% CI, 1.00–1.40) Moderate Moderate
  Prostate cancer Occupational 2006 Gun (21) Australia Effect SIR 1.18 (95% CI, 1.04–1.34) Moderate Moderate
  Prostate cancer Occupational 1997 Jarvholm (50) Sweden No effect SIR 1.1 (90% CI, 0.78–1.5) Very low NA
  Prostate cancer Occupational 2003 Lewis (51) Canada No effect SIR 0.67 (95% CI, 0.41–1.03) Very low NA
 Testicular cancer
  Testicular cancer Residential 1984 Kaldor (49) USA No effect No trend (P>.1) Low Inadequate
  Testicular cancer Occupational 2004 Gun (22) Australia No effect SIR 1.24 (95% CI, 0.68–2.08) Low Inadequate
  Testicular cancer Occupational 2006 Gun (21) Australia No effect SIR 1.33 (95% CI, 0.80–2.08) Low Inadequate
  Testicular cancer Occupational 1991 Christie (47) Australia No effect SIR 1.0(95% CI, 0.2–2.8) Very low NA
  Testicular cancer Occupational 2003 Lewis (51) Canada No effect SIR 0.82 (95% CI, 0.45–1.37) Very low NA
 Reproductive tract cancer
  Cervical cancer Residential 1984 Kaldor (49) USA No effect No trend (P>.1) Low Inadequate
  Uterine cancer Residential 1984 Kaldor (49) USA No effect No trend (P>.1) Low Inadequate
  Gynecologic cancer Residential 1989 Schechter (52) Canada No effect 1 case out of 1,038 residents (no statistical analysis) Very low NA
  Cervical cancer Occupational 2004 Gun (22) Australia No effect SIR 1.61 (95% CI, 0.33–4.71) Very low NA
  Cervical cancer Occupational 2003 Lewis (51) Canada Effect SIR 0.42 (95% CI, 0.17–0.86) Very low NA
  Uterine cancer Occupational 2003 Lewis (51) Canada Effect SIR 0.31 (95% CI, 0.06–0.89) Very low NA
  Ovarian, fallopian tube, and broad ligament cancer Occupational 2003 Lewis (51) Canada No effect SIR 1.40 (95% CI, 0.78–2.30) Very low NA
 Breast cancer
  Breast cancer Residential 1984 Kaldor (49) USA No effect No trend (P>.1) Low Inadequate
  Breast cancer Residential 1989 Schechter (52) Canada No effect 9 cases out of 1,038 residents (no statistical analysis) Very low NA
  Breast cancer Occupational 2004 Gun (22) Australia No effect SIR 1.02 (95% CI, 0.53–1.79) Low Inadequate
  Breast cancer Occupational 2003 Lewis (51) Canada No effect SIR 1.02 (95% CI, 080–1.28) Very low NA

Note: Results are limited to highest dose group or most relevant exposure group. Complete results in more descriptive detail can be found in Supplemental Table 2. China = People’s Republic of China; CI = confidence interval; FR = fecundity ratio; OR = odds ratio; ppm = parts per million; SD = standard deviation; SIR = standard incidence ratio; NA = not applicable.