Effect of antenatal exposure to maternal smoking on behavioural problems and academic achievement in childhood: prospective evidence from a dutch birth cohort
Abstract
Aim To examine effects of maternal smoking during pregnancy on academic achievement and emotional and behavioural problems during childhood.Methods Least squares regression was used to examine associations between maternal smoking prior to delivery and subsequent academic performance and behaviour of 1186 children aged 5.5-11 years. Crude associations were adjusted for risk factors that were significantly related to the respective outcomes.Main outcome measures Parents and teachers were asked to indicate, on a 10-item questionnaire, whether they regarded the child as more, the same, or less shy/withdrawn (internalising), troublesome (externalising), and attention deficient than the average child. Reading, spelling, and arithmetic performance levels were assessed with short standardised Dutch tests.Results After adjustment for confounders like socio-economic status and pre- and perinatal complications, children of mothers who smoked during pregnancy showed more signs of attention deficit and displayed higher levels of troublesome (externalising) behaviour than non-cigarette-exposed children. Also, children of smoking mothers performed worse on arithmetic and spelling tasks. Spelling problems were more pronounced when the mother continued to smoke after the child's birth. Excessively withdrawn (internalising) behaviour was not related to maternal smoking but to factors like the mother's use of psychotropic drugs and bottle-instead of breastfeeding.Conclusion Perinatal antecedents of internalising behaviour on the one hand and externalising behaviour, attention deficit, and learning problems on the other seem to be distinct. Only the latter are independently associated with maternal smoking during pregnancy and thus potentially amenable to early preventive effort, for instance, through continued health education emphasising the health hazards of nicotine use by pregnant women.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 54 · Cited by 213
- Authors
- Batstra, L., Hadders-Algra, M., & Neeleman, J.
- Affiliations
- University of Groningen (NL)
- Corresponding author
- Batstra, L.
- ORCID
- Batstra, L.
- Venue
- Early Human Development
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2003-12
- Volume
- 75
- Issue
- 1-2
- Pages
- 21-33
- ISSN
- 0378-3782 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2119789472
- Cited by
- 213
- References
- 54
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 16
- FWCI
- 7.44
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Early Human Development (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Prenatal Substance Exposure Effects
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Infant Development and Preterm Care
- Keywords
- smoking during pregnancy, prenatal nicotine exposure, child behavior problems, academic performance, attention deficits, externalizing problems, internalizing behaviour, learning difficulties, breastfeeding
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Child, Child Behavior Disorders, Child, Preschool, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Female, Humans, Learning Disabilities, Male, Netherlands, Pregnancy, Prenatal Exposure Delayed Effects, Smoking, Cohort Studies
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review