CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 170Prenatal Substance Exposure EffectsReading and Literacy DevelopmentSmoking Behavior and Cessation

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 45 of the 45 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Reading and language in 9- to 12-year olds prenatally exposed to cigarettes and marijuana

Fried, Peter A., Watkinson, Barbara, Siegel, Linda S.·1997·Neurotoxicology and Teratology
DOI 10.1016/s0892-0362(97)00015-9
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Facets of reading and language were examined in 131 9- to 12-year-old children for whom prenatal exposure to marijuana and cigarettes had been ascertained. The subjects were from a low-risk, predominantly middle class sample who are participants in an ongoing longitudinal study. Discriminant Function Analysis revealed a dose-dependent association that remained after controlling for potential confounds, between prenatal cigarette exposure and lower language and lower reading scores, particularly on auditory-related aspects of this latter measure. The findings are interpreted as consistent with earlier observations of an association between cigarette smoking during pregnancy and altered auditory functioning in the offspring. Similarities and differences between the reading observations and dyslexia are discussed. Maternal prenatal passive smoke exposure did not appear to contribute to either the language or reading outcomes at this age but postnatal secondhand smoke exposure by the child was associated with poorer language scores. Prenatal marijuana exposure was not significantly related to either the reading or language outcomes.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0892-0362(97)00015-9

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 45 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–169 of 169

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Fried, P. A., Watkinson, B., & Siegel, L. S.
Affiliations
  • Carleton University (CA)
  • University of British Columbia (CA)
Corresponding author
Fried, Peter A.
ORCID
Venue
Neurotoxicology and Teratology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1997-05
Volume
19
Issue
3
Pages
171-183
ISSN
0892-0362 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/s0892-0362(97)00015-9
OpenAlex
W2094620176
Cited by
170
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 5
FWCI
7.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • Neurotoxicology and Teratology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Drug Abuse
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Prenatal Substance Exposure Effects
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
Keywords
prenatal cannabis exposure, reading skills, language development, auditory processing, passive smoking, dyslexia, smoking during pregnancy, children aged 9-12
MeSH terms
Child, Cognition, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Language Development, Marijuana Smoking, Pregnancy, Prenatal Exposure Delayed Effects, Prospective Studies, Reading, Smoking, Confounding Factors, Epidemiologic

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