ECHO Study Outlines How Researchers Can Combine Datasets With Different Confounders*

Author(s): Ghassan B. Hamra, Bryan Lau, Catherine Lesko, Jessie Buckley, Daniel Tancredi, Irva Hertz-Picciotto, Elizabeth Jensen

*Confounders are factors in a study that can lead to bias. These factors must be adjusted so researchers can accurately understand the information.

Who sponsored this study?

This research was supported by the Environmental influences on Child Health Outcomes (ECHO) program, Office of The Director, National Institutes of Health.

What were the study results?

Most of the time, the estimators showed similar numeric values of the estimates. The exception is when using a model known as logistic regression, which did not give similar estimates. Logistic regression provides an odds ratio, which is a non-collapsible quantity, or one that cannot be reliably combined.

What was the study's impact?

This study can help researchers understand and combine information across ECHO groups. When the same confounders are not available, or when study designs are different, researchers should avoid logistic regression. Other estimators provide estimates that can be reliably combined.

Why was this study needed?

A type of graph, called Directed Acyclic Graphs (DAG), guide decisions on choosing confounders that need to be adjusted. These graphs also suggest how to get unconfounded (unbiased) effect estimates. These estimates are based on different statistical models and do not always provide the same actual numeric values. The research team explored when they do and do not correspond.

Who was involved?

Researchers from the John Hopkins University Data Analysis Center (JHU DAC), Wake Forest University, and University of California Davis joined together to explore this problem.

What happened during the study?

All study data are simulated, and Dr. Hamra at the JHU DAC built all of the models. Dr. Hamra also looked at all of the information.

What happens next?

Researchers can make more models to explore other forms of bias that could make combining information across studies difficult.

Where can I learn more?

Researchers can get the modeling code to look into this issue if they choose to in the journal article, titled “Combining Effect Estimates Across Cohorts and Sufficient Adjustment Sets for Collaborative Research: A Simulation Study” in Epidemiology.

The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

Published: May 1, 2021

Download this summary

ECHO Study Outlines How Researchers Can Combine Datasets With Different Confounders*

Best Practices for Conducting Clinical Trials with Indigenous Children in the United States

<< Back to Research Summaries

Best Practices for Conducting Clinical Trials with Indigenous Children in the United States

Author(s): Jennifer Shaw, Erin Semmens, May Okihiro, Johnnye Lewis, Matthew Hirschfeld, Timothy VanWagoner, Lancer Stephens, David Easa, Judith Ross, Niki Graham, Sara Watson, Edgardo Szyld, Denise Dillard, Lee Pyles, Paul Darden, John Carlson, Paul Smith, Russell McCulloh, Jessica Snowden, Sarah Adeky, Rosalyn Singleton

What was done?

The authors describe key ethical issues around conducting trials with Indigenous children. They review four case studies and provide guidance for conducting clinical trials involving Indigenous children.

What was found?

Based on their experience and a review of existing literature, the authors make three main recommendations for researchers conducting clinical trials involving Indigenous children:

Engage with Indigenous communities early and over the long-term to build trust and shared goals
Build capacity among Indigenous communities for leading and partnering on research studies
Support Indigenous community ownership of data and oversight of research conducted with Indigenous children

What do the results mean?

Clinical trials are needed to build evidence for child health interventions. Indigenous children must be included in clinical trials to reduce health disparities and improve health outcomes in these populations. These studies should be done in partnership with communities using established practices of community-engaged research.

Why was this study conducted?

The United States (US) population includes nearly 7 million Indigenous people, including:

5 million American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) people, and
5 million Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Island people.

Indigenous people in the US have lower life expectancies and higher disease burdens than other groups. Indigenous children have high rates of health conditions, such as asthma, obesity, and respiratory infections, compared to the general population. Few pediatric clinical trials have included Indigenous children. However, many of these children live in rural communities where interventions are often most needed. Children can respond to medicines and other health interventions differently based on their backgrounds. This paper highlights the reasons why Indigenous children may be excluded from trials and offers suggestions for improvement.

Appreciation:

The authors thank the Environmental influences on Child Health Outcomes (ECHO) program, the Office of the Director, National Institutes of Health, for supporting this research.
You can read the full publication here: https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306372

The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

Download this summary

Best Practices for Conducting Clinical Trials with Indigenous Children in the United States

ECHO Study Identifies Genetic Underpinnings of Wheezing Patterns Linked to Asthma

<< Back to Research Summaries

ECHO Study Identifies Genetic Underpinnings of Wheezing Patterns Linked to Asthma

Author(s): Brian Hallmark, et al.

Who sponsored this study?

This research was supported by the Environmental influences on Child Health Outcomes (ECHO) program, Office of The Director, National Institutes of Health under Award Number 5UH3 OD023282.

What were the study results?

Four wheezing patterns were seen among the children: (1) infrequent—few wheezing episodes in the first three years then none after that; (2) transient—some wheezing in first few years then fewer and gone by around age six; (3) late onset—little wheezing in the first few years then slowly happens more often; (4) persistent—many wheezing episodes over the first 11 years.

About half of children experience wheezing before three years old, and 62% wheezed in the first 10 years of life. The wheezing may start because of a viral infection (like the common cold). Many children only wheeze as preschoolers. AA children were more likely than European American (EA) children to have persistent wheezing.

Several small gene changes were connected to transient, late onset, and persistent wheezing in EA children, but for both AA and EA children, only two specific small gene changes were connected with a greater likelihood of the child wheezing after the first three years.

Footnote: Results reported here are for a single study. Other or future studies may provide new information or different results. You should not make changes to your health without first consulting your healthcare professional.

What was the study's impact?

For the first time, it is reported that genetic changes associated with childhood asthma are also associated with all wheezing patterns in young children. These wheezing patterns were found consistently in children located in different cities and born in different decades.

Wheezing in young children is often a result of common respiratory viruses that affect breathing. These findings, together with what we know about the genes associated with asthma, suggest that some of these small gene changes may be connected to a higher risk of colds and other viral airway infections that trigger wheezing in small children.

This study also highlights the importance of including multiple race/ancestry groups in genetic studies to understand how small changes in genes are connected to different health outcomes in diverse groups.

Why was this study needed?

Previous studies have shown that many children wheeze during the first few years of life—some later stop, while others can develop ongoing asthma. Other children do not wheeze during early life but still develop asthma later during childhood. Understanding where these patterns come from may shed light on how asthma begins and help doctors identify children who might need help earlier. Other studies identified small changes in specific genes that could be responsible for some cases of childhood asthma. This study tried to find possible connections between those small gene changes and different wheezing patterns in children. This is also the first study that looks at how small genetic changes may relate to specific patterns of wheezing in African American (AA) children.

Who was involved?

Data came from children enrolled at birth in seven different studies across the US. Nearly 3,700 children who experienced at least three wheezing events were included, and researchers analyzed the genes of 1,928 of these children. About 32% of these children were AA. Each study site used questionnaires and interviews to collect information from children and their parents over many years.

What happened during the study?

The team collected patient characteristics and data on wheezing and asthma and pulled those data together to group each child based on when and how often they wheezed from birth to age 11. Each site also collected DNA samples from the children and sent them to be analyzed for small changes in genes associated with asthma. The researchers used statistics to identify four different wheezing patterns and connect them with specific genetic changes.

What happens next?

The team is looking at possible associations between children’s insulin levels, genetic variations, and the development of asthma in childhood.

Where can I learn more?

Access the full journal article, titled “Chromosome 17q12-21 Variants Are Associated with Multiple Wheezing Phenotypes in Childhood,” in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine.

Additional Details

This project would not have been possible without ECHO CREW support, as the data came from seven separate birth cohorts brought together by that program. In particular, combining those datasets was essential to getting a large enough sample size to include AA children.

The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

Read the corresponding article.

Published: April 1, 2021

Download this summary

ECHO Study Identifies Genetic Underpinnings of Wheezing Patterns Linked to Asthma

ECHO Study Finds Children Are Less Likely to Get the Common Cold as They Get Older

<< Back to Research Summaries

ECHO Study Finds Children Are Less Likely to Get the Common Cold as They Get Older

Author(s): Timothy Choi, James E. Gern and Yury A. Bochkov

Who sponsored this study?

This research was supported by the Environmental influences on Child Health Outcomes (ECHO) program, Office of The Director, National Institutes of Health. Additional support came from contributing studies by the NIH, the Sigrid Juselius Foundation (Helsinki, Finland) and the National Health Medical Research Council (Australia).

What were the study results?

As children age, they are less likely to be infected with the rhinovirus C species. This may be because the immune system gets stronger against infection with rhinovirus C species compared to other species. Other personal factors related to more frequent infections are wheezing respiratory illnesses and a genetic difference in a protein used by the viruses to enter cells.

Footnote: Results reported here are for a single study. Other or future studies may provide new information or different results. You should not make changes to your health care without first consulting your healthcare professional.

What was the study's impact?

Infections with rhinoviruses, generally known as common colds, are the most common cause of wheezing illnesses in preschoolers and children with asthma. Unfortunately, there are no treatments for these respiratory viruses. The results of the study identify children most likely to develop more severe illnesses with rhinovirus C based on young age and genetics. This new information on at-risk populations and the viruses most likely to cause illnesses can help scientists create a vaccine specifically for the rhinovirus C species.

Why was this study needed?

Rhinovirus is a leading cause of the common cold and wheezing illnesses in young children and in children with asthma. There are three species of rhinoviruses (A, B, and C), and C viruses are often more likely to cause wheezing illnesses, especially in young children. The main objectives of this study were to identify age and other personal risk factors for rhinovirus illnesses, and to determine whether certain rhinoviruses are more frequent and more likely to cause wheezing illnesses.

Who was involved?

More than 4,000 children were enrolled in 14 independent studies across the United States, Finland, and Australia from 2000 to 2019. Study participants had illnesses of varying severity and varied in age from zero to 19 years.

What happened during the study?

Each of the 14 sites collected nasal samples and studied them for rhinovirus species and type. The investigators then tested whether characteristics such as age, gender, and race influenced which viruses were seen. Investigators also identified which viruses are most common and which are most likely to cause illnesses.

What happens next?

Future research will focus on studying the strength and length of time people can be immune to rhinovirus C. This will help determine why these viruses are able to produce such a strong immune response, and why rhinovirus C infections decrease with age. This information may help researchers design a practical vaccine against rhinovirus C that could be used to protect high-risk children.

Where can I learn more?

View the full journal article, titled "Enhanced Neutralizing Antibody Responses to Rhinovirus C and Age-Dependent Patterns of Infection," in American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine.

Additional details

The authors thank the many investigators, children and families who conducted and participated in this multinational collaborative study.

The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

Published: April 1, 2021

Download this summary

ECHO Study Finds Children Are Less Likely to Get the Common Cold as They Get Older

ECHO Discovery

Co-author James Gern presented An Integrated Approach to Identifying Early Life Causes of Childhood Asthma at a past ECHO Discovery webinar. You can view his presentation here.

Phenobarbital and Clonidine as Secondary Medications for Neonatal Opioid Withdrawal Syndrome

<< Back to Research Summaries

Phenobarbital and Clonidine as Secondary Medications for Neonatal Opioid Withdrawal Syndrome

Author(s): Stephanie Merhar, Songthip Ounpraseuth, Lori Devlin, et al.

What was done?

We reviewed medical records from 30 U.S. hospitals. There were 180 babies with NOWS treated with morphine (M) and a secondary drug [phenobarbital (P) or clonidine (C)]. We compared the two groups (M + P and M + C) and calculated the number of days spent in the hospital and the number of days they received morphine.

What was found?

Babies in the M + P group had fewer days of morphine treatment compared to babies in the M + C group. They also spent fewer days in the hospital than the M + C group. However, babies in the M + P group were more likely to continue taking phenobarbital at home.

What do the results mean?

In this study, babies treated with M + P had shorter hospital stays, and in some cases, fewer days of morphine treatment. But, some studies show that long-term use of phenobarbital could cause problems with the development of the nervous system. More research is needed on the benefits and risks of using this drug to treat NOWS symptoms.

Why was this study conducted?

Babies exposed to opioids (e.g., morphine, methadone, etc.) in the womb may have drug withdrawal symptoms called neonatal opioid withdrawal syndrome (NOWS) after birth. Some are given medicine for their symptoms. If the medicine doesn’t work, doctors may add other (secondary) medicine to the treatment. This study looked at two secondary drugs used most often to see if one was better than the other in NOWS treatment.

Appreciation:

We deeply appreciate the doctors, nurses, and hospitals that participated in the study and helped identify and extract information from the required medical records. Their enthusiastic collaboration made this study possible. The authors thank the Environmental Influences on Child Health Outcomes Program, the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, and the National Institutes of Health for supporting this research.

Access the full journal article, titled "Phenobarbital and Clonidine as Secondary Medications for Neonatal Opioid Withdrawal Syndrome," published in Pediatrics.

Published March, 2021

The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

Download this summary

Phenobarbital and Clonidine as Secondary Medications for Neonatal Opioid Withdrawal Syndrome

Resources

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)

About Opioid Use During Pregnancy

Related Research Summaries

Site-Level Variation in the Characteristics and Care of Infants with Neonatal Opioid Withdrawal

Author(s): Leslie Young, Zhuopei Hu, Robert Annett, et al.

The ACT NOW Clinical Practice Survey: Gaps in the Care of Infants With Neonatal Opioid Withdrawal Syndrome

Author(s): Jessica Snowden, Akshatha, Robert Annett, et al

How does prenatal opioid exposure affect child outcomes?

Author(s): Elisabeth Conradt, Sheila Crowell, Barry Lester

ECHO Study Suggests PCBs in Soil, Water, Building Materials Increase Time Couples Need to Get Pregnant

<< Back to Research Summaries

ECHO Study Suggests PCBs in Soil, Water, Building Materials Increase Time Couples Need to Get Pregnant

Author(s): Linda Kahn, Alison Hipwell, Kim Harley, Pam Factor-Litvak, Michele Klein-Fedyshin, Christine Porucznik, Eva Siegel, Yeyi Zhu

Who sponsored this study?

This research was supported by the Environmental influences on Child Health Outcomes (ECHO) program, Office of The Director, National Institutes of Health. Individual authors were additionally supported by the National Institutes of Environmental Health Sciences, Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, and Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism.

What were the study results?

The strongest evidence points to a connection between human-made chemicals called polychlorinated biphenyls and a longer time to get pregnant. These chemicals used to be used in electrical and hydraulic equipment. Even though production of these chemicals stopped in the late 1970s, we are still exposed to them through soil, water, and building materials. Another group of chemicals called organochlorine pesticides do not seem to affect the time it takes to get pregnant. We still need more research on brominated flame retardants, found in furniture, clothing, and other household products, and per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, found in non-stick cookware and stain-resistant fabrics. Many of the newer chemicals in these categories have not yet been studied.

What was the study's impact?

This review shows that some long-lasting chemicals may increase the time it takes for couples to get pregnant. This can be stressful and lead couples to seek expensive fertility treatment. Although many of the chemicals covered in our review are no longer made or used in the US, they can last for years—even decades—in the environment and in our bodies. Therefore, they can still affect our health. We need more research on newer chemicals that have been invented to replace dangerous ones. We also need to figure out exactly how these chemicals interfere with healthy reproduction. For example, there may be times in life, such as puberty, when being exposed to them may be especially damaging. The ECHO Program is an important resource for answering these questions.

Why was this study needed?

Some human-made chemicals can cause problems with the reproductive system. Many studies have looked at whether these chemicals affect how long it takes to get pregnant. How long it takes to become pregnant is a sign of a couple’s reproductive health and can be a sign that they need to seek fertility treatment. Our review compares the results of past studies to see if there are consistent patterns for particular types of chemicals. It also identifies chemicals that need further research.

Who was involved?

This review includes all papers published in English on this topic from January 1, 2007 to August 6, 2019. Our search looked at 28 articles. These articles used data from 19 different studies. The studies took place in North America, Europe, and East Asia.

What happened during the study?

We searched five science libraries and found more than 4500 articles that could possibly fit our topic and narrowed them down to the 28 articles discussed in our paper. We read each article carefully, gave it a score based on its quality, and pulled out the most important information. This included whether the chemicals the paper looked at affected how long it took to get pregnant, and if so, by how much. We then put that information into tables. Finally, we looked at whether or not results were consistent, especially among high-quality studies. We then drew our conclusions.

What happens next?

This is the second review that this team of authors has written on chemicals and time to pregnancy. Our next paper will look at whether different types of air pollution affect how long it takes to get pregnant.

Where can I learn more?

Access the full journal article titled "Persistent organic pollutants and couple fecundability: a systematic review" published in Human Reproduction Update.

The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

Published: February 19, 2021

Download this summary

ECHO Study Suggests PCBs in Soil, Water, Building Materials Increase Time Couples Need to Get Pregnant

ECHO Study Identifies Disparities in Preterm Birth Risk Based on Race, Ethnicity, Neighborhood Conditions, Education Level

<< Back to Research Summaries

ECHO Study Identifies Disparities in Preterm Birth Risk Based on Race, Ethnicity, Neighborhood Conditions, Education Level

Author(s): Anne L. Dunlop, Alicynne Glazier-Essalmi, et al.

Who sponsored this study?

This research was supported by the Environmental influences on Child Health Outcomes (ECHO) program, Office of The Director, National Institutes of Health.

What were the study results?

There were differences in how early the baby was born based on the mother’s race and ethnicity. Compared to non-Hispanic white women, women of all other races had a higher chance of PTB. For women overall, a bachelor’s degree or above was linked to less chances of PTB, and a high school education or less led to higher chances of PTB. This link between education level and PTB was mostly seen in non-Hispanic white women and those who lived in the South and Midwest regions of the US. This study also collected data on neighborhood factors; non-Hispanic white women living in a rural area had a higher chance of PTB delivery compared to women living in an urban area.

What was the study's impact?

This study explored an important gap in the field of children’s health. It gathered information on how factors such as the mother’s race/ethnicity, location, education level, and SES affect if a baby is born early. The results show that higher education among women could help decrease the chances of PTB in the US, especially in the South and Midwest regions.

Why was this study needed?

There are high rates of preterm birth (PTB) in the US. Previous studies show that the rates of PTB are different based on race and location, but there is not much information available on what causes these differences. This study also explored the link between the mother’s SES, race, and location and how they affect the baby’s age at birth. Socioeconomic status (SES) is a combination of factors such as education, income, and occupation.

Who was involved?

Women enrolled in the ECHO Program who delivered a baby were included in this study. They provided all of the required information about themselves and their infant. More than 20,000 mother-infant pairs participated.

What happened during the study?

Researchers studied a variety of information including the mother’s age at delivery, education, physical address or region, alcohol use, prenatal care, and the child’s birth sex and how many weeks they were at birth. They took this information and looked for patterns and connections between factors that affect PTB.

What happens next?

Non-Hispanic Black women, Native American, and Alaskan Native women have the highest rates of PTB. Future studies in these populations will help explore the causes for these differences and figure out ways to prevent PTB.

Where can I learn more?

View the full journal article, titled “Racial and geographic variation in effects of maternal education and neighborhood-level measures of socioeconomic status on gestational age at birth: Findings from the ECHO cohorts” in PLOS One.

The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

Published: January 8, 2021

Download this summary

ECHO Study Identifies Disparities in Preterm Birth Risk Based on Race, Ethnicity, Neighborhood Conditions, Education Level

Site-Level Variation in the Characteristics and Care of Infants with Neonatal Opioid Withdrawal

<< Back to Research Summaries

Site-Level Variation in the Characteristics and Care of Infants with Neonatal Opioid Withdrawal

Author(s): Leslie Young, Zhuopei Hu, Robert Annett, et al.

What was done?

The medical records of babies born between July 1, 2016 and June 30, 2017 and their mothers were reviewed at 30 U.S. hospitals. From these records, 1377 babies were selected for the study.

For the babies, we looked at how many were given medicines for their NOWS symptoms and what they ate. We also looked at how long they were in the hospital, and who they went home with. For the mothers, we looked at what types of care they had during their pregnancy.

What was found?

The hospitals in this study varied in how they took care of pregnant women with opioid use and their babies.

In the babies:

6% to 100% received medicine for NOWS symptoms,
22% to 83% were fed breast milk,
length of hospital stay was 2 to 28 days, and
33% to 91% went home with their parents.

In the mothers:

6% to 100% were given medicine for their opioid use disorder,
31% to 100% received adequate medical care during their pregnancy, and
2% to 75% received prenatal counseling.

What do the results mean?

This study suggests that the care for pregnant women who use opioids and their babies differs widely in the U.S. This means that some mothers and babies may not be getting the best care.

More research into the care we provide will help doctors find a standardized way to care for babies with NOWS. Standardized care will help all babies with NOWS get the best care possible.

Why was this study conducted?

Babies exposed to opioids in the womb may show signs of withdrawal after birth. This is called neonatal opioid withdrawal syndrome (NOWS). Babies with NOWS may tremble, have increased crying, or be more difficult to calm. They also may not sleep or eat well.

In the U.S., there is not a standard way to care for babies with NOWS after they are born. That means U.S. doctors may be treating babies with NOWS in different ways. This study looked at the variation in the care provided to babies with NOWS in the U.S.

Appreciation:

We deeply appreciate the doctors, nurses, and hospitals that participated in the study and helped identify and extract information from the required medical records. Their enthusiastic collaboration made this study possible. The authors thank the Environmental Influences on Child Health Outcomes Program, the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, and the National Institutes of Health for supporting this research.

Access the full journal article, titled "Site-Level Variation in the Characteristics and Care of Infants With Neonatal Opioid Withdrawal," published in Pediatrics.

Published January 2021

The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

Download this summary

Site-Level Variation in the Characteristics and Care of Infants with Neonatal Opioid Withdrawal

Resources

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)

About Opioid Use During Pregnancy

Related Research Summaries

Phenobarbital and Clonidine as Secondary Medications for Neonatal Opioid Withdrawal Syndrome

Author(s): Stephanie Merhar, Songthip Ounpraseuth, Lori Devlin, et al.

The ACT NOW Clinical Practice Survey: Gaps in the Care of Infants With Neonatal Opioid Withdrawal Syndrome

Author(s): Jessica Snowden, Akshatha, Robert Annett, et al

How does prenatal opioid exposure affect child outcomes?

Author(s): Elisabeth Conradt, Sheila Crowell, Barry Lester

Pregnant Women Exposed to Various Chemicals, Including Chemicals in Personal Care Products and Consumer Goods

<< Back to Research Summaries

Pregnant Women Exposed to Various Chemicals, Including Chemicals in Personal Care Products and Consumer Goods

Author(s): Brett Doherty and Megan Romano

Who sponsored this study?

Research reported in this publication was supported by the Environmental influences on Child Health Outcomes (ECHO) program, Office of The Director, National Institutes of Health, and grant funding.*

What were the study results?

Researchers found 199 unique chemicals in the wristbands worn by women in the study. There were 16 chemicals, including chemicals in personal care products and consumer goods, which were found most often. Most women had comparatively low amounts of exposures to these chemicals but others had more unique combinations of chemical exposures. Education and behaviors, such as nail polish use, helped predict the level of chemical exposures.

What was the study's impact?

This work helps identify opportunities and challenges for using tools like silicone wristbands to understand chemical exposures during pregnancy. The research team also identified common exposures and exposure patterns within the study population, which may be studied in future research.

Why was this study needed?

Pregnant women are exposed to chemicals that may be bad for their health or their babies’ health. At the same time, the types of chemicals and their co-occurrence are not well understood. The researchers used silicone wristbands that capture chemicals in the environment to learn more about these exposures in a group of pregnant women in northern New England.

Who was involved?

This study included 255 women enrolled in the New Hampshire Birth Cohort Study (NHBCS) between 2017 and 2019. The NHBCS began in 2009 and includes more than 2,000 mother and child pairs.

What happened during the study?

During early pregnancy, the women wore the wristbands and went about their normal activities while chemicals in their environment became trapped in their wristbands. The women then returned the wristbands after one week and researchers measured the captured chemicals. This provided information about the chemicals in the women’s environments.

What happens next?

The team will connect the chemical exposure information collected from the silicone wristbands to maternal and infant health outcomes. This connection may show how chemicals influence human health and provide clues to prevent health problems. The team will also compare these wristband measurements to traditional measurements of chemical exposures. This will help scientists better understand the strengths and weaknesses of this new technology.

Where can I learn more?

Access the full journal article , titled “Assessment of Multipollutant Exposures During Pregnancy Using Silicone Wristbands” published in Frontiers in Public Health.

Additional details

This work included collaboration with Dr. John Pearce, who, like Dr. Romano, is an OIF Cycle 1 Awardee. Dr. Pearce provided expertise related to the statistical methods used in this research, which he developed through his project entitled “Developing exposure characterization tools to address complex exposures within ECHO” (EC0155).

*Award Numbers include U2COD023375 (Coordinating Center), U24OD023382 (Data Analysis Center), and UH3 OD023275, and the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences under Award Number P42ES007373. Brett T. Doherty was supported by National Cancer Institute grant R25CA134286.

The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

Published: September 29, 2020

Download this summary

Pregnant Women Exposed to Various Chemicals, Including Chemicals in Personal Care Products and Consumer Goods

Better Sleep Quality Is Linked to Lower Levels of Stress and Better General Health in Children

<< Back to Research Summaries

Better Sleep Quality Is Linked to Lower Levels of Stress and Better General Health in Children

Author: Courtney K. Blackwell

Who sponsored this study?

This research was supported by the Environmental influences on Child Health Outcomes (ECHO) program, Office of The Director, National Institutes of Health.

What were the study results?

Results suggested better sleep quality was connected with lower levels of stress and better general health. This, in turn, predicted higher levels of life satisfaction. Findings remained stable for a subsample of children with the poorest sleep quality.

*Results reported here are for a single study. Other or future studies may provide new information or different results. You should not make changes to your health without first consulting your healthcare professional.

What was the study's impact?

Children who sleep well have happier lives than those who do not sleep as well. Given the varying nature of children’s sleep quality, this study offers findings to inform future studies that want to test specific ways to improve children’s well-being. Ways to improve sleep may include education programs for parents that teach parents how to prevent things that keep children from sleeping well (e.g., ways to lower screen time in the hour before bed). Other ideas may include looking at how elementary school start times affect children’s sleep quality.

Why was this study needed?

Sleep quality is important to children’s health and well-being. Until now, research has focused on how poor sleep may cause health problems. The current study explored if and how better sleep quality may lead to positive health in children.

Who was involved?

More than 1000 caregivers of 5- to 9-year-old children from 3 ECHO Program cohorts participated in this study. Participants were from different places in the United States, had different financial backgrounds and 10% were of Hispanic origin.

What happened during the study?

Between March and December 2017, caregivers completed surveys about their children’s sleep quality, general health, stress, and life satisfaction.

What happens next?

This study provides early evidence on the ways better sleep can improve the lives of children. Future research with more diverse samples can make these findings apply to more people. Additionally, measures to try with younger children are available so that we can see how this affects children younger than 5.

Where can I learn more?

Access the full journal article, titled “Better sleep, better life? How sleep quality influences children's life satisfaction.”

The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

Published: September 29, 2020

Download this summary

Better Sleep Quality Is Linked to Lower Levels of Stress and Better General Health in Children