Evidence Hub

Impact of early life exposure to heat and cold on linguistic development in two-year-old children: findings from the ELFE cohort study

Guillaume Barbalat, A. Guilbert, Lucie Adélaïde, Marie-Aline Charles, Ian Hough, L. Launay, I. Kloog, J. Lepeule

Environmental Health, 2025

12,163 participants · 13 citations

Abstract

A number of negative developmental outcomes in response to extreme temperature have been documented. Yet, to our knowledge, environmental research has left the question of the effect of temperature on human neurodevelopment largely unexplored. Here, we aimed to investigate the effect of ambient temperature on linguistic development at the age of 2 years-old. We used data from the prospective national French birth cohort ELFE (N = 12,163) and highly-resolved exposure models with daily temporal resolution and 200 m to 1 km spatial resolution. We investigated the effect of weekly averages of overall, daytime and night-time temperature in the prenatal (first 30 weeks of gestation) and postnatal (91 weeks after birth) period on vocabulary production scores from the MacArthur-Bates Communicative Development Inventories (MB-CDI) at 2 years-old. Exposure-response and lag-response relationships were modeled with confounder-adjusted distributed lag non-linear models. Scores at the MB-CDI decreased by 3.2% (relative risk (RR) 0.968, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.939–0.998) following exposure to severe night-time heat of 15.6 °C (95th percentile) vs. 8.3 °C (median) throughout gestational weeks 14 to 19. In the postnatal period, scores at the MB-CDI decreased by 14.8% (RR 0.852; 95% CI: [0.756–0.96]) for severe overall heat of 21.9 °C (95th percentile) vs. 11.5 °C (median) throughout weeks 1 to 28. Consistent results were found for daytime and night-time heat. We observed positive…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 12,163 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free