This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

48/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100. Risk factors

Topic: Air pollution and environmental exposures

614 subjects were available for investigation at follow-up. Follow-up analysis confirmed that the risk of obtaining a low performance on the tests was higher in exposed subjects, with ORs ranging from 1.35 to 5.60. Evolution of performances over the follow-up period demonstrated that exposed subjects had the worst decreases in performance. The risk of having a two-point lower score on the Mini-Mental State Examination was 2.15 (95% CI 1.18 to 3.94) in exposed subjects. These results suggest long-term cognitive effects of chronic exposure to pesticides and raise the issue of the risk of evolution towards dementia. The PHYTONER study is the first to provide prospective data on the natural history of neurological disorders associated with pesticide exposure.

Key findings

614 subjects were available for investigation at follow-up.
Follow-up analysis confirmed that the risk of obtaining a low performance on the tests was higher in exposed subjects, with ORs ranging from 1.35 to 5.60.
Evolution of performances over the follow-up period demonstrated that exposed subjects had the worst decreases in performance.
The risk of having a two-point lower score on the Mini-Mental State Examination was 2.15 (95% CI 1.18 to 3.94) in exposed subjects.
These results suggest long-term cognitive effects of chronic exposure to pesticides and raise the issue of the risk of evolution towards dementia.

New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Risk factors, ranked →

Study details

Participants614
Evidence strengthLow

How this study scored 48/100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 28 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 48 out of 100.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Occupational and Environmental Medicine)
Journal's citation record	— / 4	No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design	0 / 12	No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Strength of evidence	1 / 5	Rated “low” in our summary
Peer-review validation	10 / 10	Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent	1 / 5	2010 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size	2 / 4	614 participants
Effect reported	0 / 3	No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people	3 / 3	Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomised / blinded	0 / 2	No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited	— / 7	No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score
Citations per year	— / 5	No citation count or no year — left out of this score
Impact for its field and year	— / 6	No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score
Cited by studies here	— / 6	Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score
Still being cited	— / 4	No yearly citation counts — left out of this score
Senior author's track record	— / 4	Senior author's record not available — left out of this score
Institution's track record	— / 3	No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score
Multi-centre collaboration	— / 3	Institutions not listed — left out of this score
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 21097948)
Free to read	2 / 2	Free to read
Points	28 / 58	Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 28 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 48 out of 100.
Total	48 / 100	—

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

APA 7th

Baldi, I., Grüber, A., Rondeau, V., Lebailly, P., Brochard, P., & Fabrigoule, C. (2010). Neurobehavioral effects of long-term exposure to pesticides: results from the 4-year follow-up of the PHYTONER Study. Occupational and Environmental Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1136/oem.2009.047811

Vancouver

Baldi I, Grüber A, Rondeau V, Lebailly P, Brochard P, Fabrigoule C. Neurobehavioral effects of long-term exposure to pesticides: results from the 4-year follow-up of the PHYTONER Study. Occupational and Environmental Medicine. 2010. doi:10.1136/oem.2009.047811. PMID: 21097948.

BibTeX

@article{baldi2010-21097948,
  author  = {Baldi, Isabelle and Grüber, Anne and Rondeau, Virginie and Lebailly, Pierre and Brochard, Patrick and Fabrigoule, Colette},
  title   = {{Neurobehavioral effects of long-term exposure to pesticides: results from the 4-year follow-up of the PHYTONER Study}},
  journal = {Occupational and Environmental Medicine},
  year    = {2010},
  doi     = {10.1136/oem.2009.047811},
  pmid    = {21097948},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1136/oem.2009.047811}
}

Related studies in Risk factors

Also tagged “air”

237 studies in the library carry the topic tag “air”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 237 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Risk factors

See all studies in Risk factors →