Evidence Hub

Maternal smoking, consumption of alcohol, and caffeinated beverages during pregnancy and the risk of childhood brain tumors: a meta-analysis of observational studies

Zihao Hu, Jian-Bo Ye, Shen-Bao Shi, Chuangcai Luo, Tianwei Wang, Yang Liu, Jing'an Ye, Xinlin Sun et al.

BMC Public Health, 2024

9 participants · 6 citations

Abstract

We conducted this meta-analysis to investigate the potential association between maternal smoking, alcohol and caffeinated beverages consumption during pregnancy and the risk of childhood brain tumors (CBTs). A thorough search was carried out on PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and China National Knowledge Internet to identify pertinent articles. Fixed or random effects model was applied to meta-analyze the data. The results suggested a borderline statistically significant increased risk of CBTs associated with maternal smoking during pregnancy (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.99–1.09). We found that passive smoking (OR 1.12, 95% CI 1.03–1.20), rather than active smoking (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.93–1.07), led to an increased risk of CBTs. The results suggested a higher risk in 0–1 year old children (OR 1.21, 95% CI 0.94–1.56), followed by 0–4 years old children (OR 1.12, 95% CI 0.97–1.28) and 5–9 years old children (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.95–1.29). This meta-analysis found no significant association between maternal alcohol consumption during pregnancy and CBTs risk (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.80–1.24). An increased risk of CBTs was found to be associated with maternal consumption of caffeinated beverages (OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.07–1.26) during pregnancy, especially coffee (OR 1.18, 95% CI 1.00–1.38). Maternal passive smoking, consumption of caffeinated beverages during pregnancy should be considered as risk factors for CBTs, especially glioma. More prospective cohort studies are warranted to…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 9 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