Cited by 267Prenatal Substance Exposure EffectsSmoking Behavior and CessationChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development

Smoking during pregnancy and offspring externalizing problems: An exploration of genetic and environmental confounds

Open access
D'Onofrio, Brian M., Hulle, Carol A. van, Waldman, Irwin D., Rodgers, Joseph Lee, Harden, K. Paige, Rathouz, Paul J., Lahey, Benjamin B.·2008·Development and Psychopathology

Abstract

Previous studies have documented that smoking during pregnancy (SDP) is associated with offspring externalizing problems, even when measured covariates were used to control for possible confounds. However, the association may be because of nonmeasured environmental and genetic factors that increase risk for offspring externalizing problems. The current project used the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth and their children, ages 4–10 years, to explore the relations between SDP and offspring conduct problems (CPs), oppositional defiant problems (ODPs), and attention-deficit/hyperactivity problems (ADHPs) using methodological and statistical controls for confounds. When offspring were compared to their own siblings who differed in their exposure to prenatal nicotine, there was no effect of SDP on offspring CP and ODP. This suggests that SDP does not have a causal effect on offspring CP and ODP. There was a small association between SDP and ADHP, consistent with a causal effect of SDP, but the magnitude of the association was greatly reduced by methodological and statistical controls. Genetically informed analyses suggest that unmeasured environmental variables influencing both SDP and offspring externalizing behaviors account for the previously observed associations. That is, the current analyses imply that important unidentified environmental factors account for the association between SDP and offspring externalizing problems, not teratogenic effects of SDP.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0954579408000072

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Traditional studies of prenatal tobacco exposure and behavioral outcomes have a major limitation: they cannot fully control for confounding, especially family environment and genetic factors.

    “a major limitation of traditional approaches to studies of prenatal tobacco exposure and behavioral outcomes has been the inability to fully control for potential confounding factors, particularly family environment and genetic factors.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
D'Onofrio, B. M., Hulle, C. A. V., Waldman, I. D., Rodgers, J. L., Harden, K. P., Rathouz, P. J., & Lahey, B. B.
Affiliations
  • Indiana University Bloomington (US)
  • University of Chicago (US)
  • Emory University (US)
  • University of Oklahoma (US)
  • University of Virginia (US)
Corresponding author
D'Onofrio, Brian M.
Venue
Development and Psychopathology
Published
2008
Volume
20
Issue
1
Pages
139-164
ISSN
  • 0954-5794 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-2198
OpenAlex
W2118423646
Cited by
267
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 30 · 2012: 29
FWCI
21.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Development and Psychopathology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH070025)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Prenatal Substance Exposure Effects
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Keywords
maternal smoking, smoking during pregnancy, conduct problems, sibling comparison, genetic confounding, environmental confounding, causal inference, teratogenicity, National Longitudinal Survey of Youth
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aggression, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Child, Child, Preschool, Diseases in Twins, Female, Humans, Infant, Infant, Newborn, Internal-External Control, Juvenile Delinquency, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Pregnancy, Prenatal Exposure Delayed Effects, Risk Factors, Smoking, Social Environment, United States, Models, Statistical, Causality, Cluster Analysis, Conduct Disorder, Attention Deficit and Disruptive Behavior Disorders, Genetic Predisposition to Disease, Siblings

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