The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Maternal Fish Consumption, Hair Mercury, and Infant Cognition in a U.S. Cohort
Open accessAbstract
Fish and other seafood may contain organic mercury but also beneficial nutrients such as n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids. We endeavored to study whether maternal fish consumption during pregnancy harms or benefits fetal brain development. We examined associations of maternal fish intake during pregnancy and maternal hair mercury at delivery with infant cognition among 135 mother-infant pairs in Project Viva, a prospective U.S. pregnancy and child cohort study. We assessed infant cognition by the percent novelty preference on visual recognition memory (VRM) testing at 6 months of age. Mothers consumed an average of 1.2 fish servings per week during the second trimester. Mean maternal hair mercury was 0.55 ppm, with 10% of samples > 1.2 ppm. Mean VRM score was 59.8 (range, 10.9-92.5). After adjusting for participant characteristics using linear regression, higher fish intake was associated with higher infant cognition. This association strengthened after adjustment for hair mercury level: For each additional weekly fish serving, offspring VRM score was 4.0 points higher [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.3 to 6.7]. However, an increase of 1 ppm in mercury was associated with a decrement in VRM score of 7.5 (95% CI, -13.7 to -1.2) points. VRM scores were highest among infants of women who consumed > 2 weekly fish servings but had mercury levels </= 1.2 ppm. Higher fish consumption in pregnancy was associated with better infant cognition, but higher mercury levels were associated with lower cognition. Women should continue to eat fish during pregnancy but choose varieties with lower mercury contamination.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Rice, D., & Barone, S. (2000) · Environmental Health Perspectives · doi:10.1289/ehp.00108s3511 · Cited by 2,944
Cited by
Fish Intake, Contaminants, and Human Health: Evaluating the Risks and the Benefits
Mozaffarian, D., & Rimm, E. B. (2006) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.296.15.1885 · Cited by 1,966
Transfer of heavy metals through terrestrial food webs: a review
Gall, J. E., Boyd, R. S., & Rajakaruna, N. (2015) · Environmental Monitoring and Assessment · doi:10.1007/s10661-015-4436-3 · Cited by 893
Koletzko, B., Lien, E., Agostoni, C., Böhles, H., Campoy, C., Cetin, I., Decsi, T., Dudenhausen, J. W., Dupont, C., Forsyth, S., et al. (2008) · Journal of Perinatal Medicine · doi:10.1515/jpm.2008.001 · Cited by 707
Oken, E., Radesky, J. S., Wright, R. O., Bellinger, D. C., Amarasiriwardena, C. J., Kleinman, K. P., Hu, H., & Gillman, M. W. (2008) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/aje/kwn034 · Cited by 423
Self-citationDietary sources of omega 3 fatty acids: public health risks and benefits
Tur, J. A., Bibiloni, M. M., Sureda, A., & Pons, A. (2012) · British Journal of Nutrition · doi:10.1017/s0007114512001456 · Cited by 283
Metadata
- Authors
- Oken, E., Wright, R. O., Kleinman, K. P., Bellinger, D., Amarasiriwardena, C. J., Hu, H., Rich-Edwards, J. W., & Gillman, M. W.
- Venue
- Environmental Health Perspectives
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2005-10
- Volume
- 113
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 1376-1380
- ISSN
- 0091-6765 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-9924
- OpenAlex
- W2129735882
- Cited by
- 492
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 22.14
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Maternal Fish Consumption, Hair Mercury, and Infant Cognition in a U.S. Cohort. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1289/ehp.8041
- The paper
- Oken, E., Wright, R. O., Kleinman, K. P., Bellinger, D., Amarasiriwardena, C. J., Hu, H., Rich-Edwards, J. W., & Gillman, M. W. (2005). Maternal Fish Consumption, Hair Mercury, and Infant Cognition in a U.S. Cohort. Environmental Health Perspectives. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.8041
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.