Chemotherapy

Leukemia survivors had a higher risk of preterm birth and low birth weight in their first live singleton birth conceived after diagnosis.

Effect: decline; RR=2.1; CI: 95% CI: 1.3, 3.5

Leukemia survivors had a higher risk of preterm birth and low birth weight in their first live singleton birth conceived after diagnosis.

Effect: decline; RR=2.1; CI: 95% CI: 1.3, 3.5

Leukemia survivors had a higher risk of preterm birth and low birth weight in their first live singleton birth conceived after diagnosis.

Effect: decline; RR=2.1; CI: 95% CI: 1.3, 3.5

Leukemia survivors had a higher risk of preterm birth and low birth weight in their first live singleton birth conceived after diagnosis.

Effect: decline; RR=2.1; CI: 95% CI: 1.3, 3.5

Leukemia survivors had a higher risk of preterm birth and low birth weight in their first live singleton birth conceived after diagnosis.

Effect: decline; RR=2.1; CI: 95% CI: 1.3, 3.5

Leukemia survivors had a higher risk of preterm birth and low birth weight in their first live singleton birth conceived after diagnosis.

Effect: decline; RR=2.1; CI: 95% CI: 1.3, 3.5

Leukemia survivors had a higher risk of preterm birth and low birth weight in their first live singleton birth conceived after diagnosis.

Effect: decline; RR=2.1; CI: 95% CI: 1.3, 3.5

Leukemia survivors had a higher risk of preterm birth and low birth weight in their first live singleton birth conceived after diagnosis.

Effect: decline; RR=2.1; CI: 95% CI: 1.3, 3.5

Leukemia survivors had a higher risk of preterm birth and low birth weight in their first live singleton birth conceived after diagnosis.

Effect: decline; RR=2.1; CI: 95% CI: 1.3, 3.5

Leukemia survivors had a higher risk of preterm birth and low birth weight in their first live singleton birth conceived after diagnosis.

Effect: decline; RR=2.1; CI: 95% CI: 1.3, 3.5

Leukemia survivors had a higher risk of preterm birth and low birth weight in their first live singleton birth conceived after diagnosis.

Effect: decline; RR=2.1; CI: 95% CI: 1.3, 3.5

Leukemia survivors had a higher risk of preterm birth and low birth weight in their first live singleton birth conceived after diagnosis.

Effect: decline; RR=2.1; CI: 95% CI: 1.3, 3.5

Leukemia survivors had a higher risk of preterm birth and low birth weight in their first live singleton birth conceived after diagnosis.

Effect: decline; RR=2.1; CI: 95% CI: 1.3, 3.5

Leukemia survivors had a higher risk of preterm birth and low birth weight in their first live singleton birth conceived after diagnosis.

Effect: decline; RR=2.1; CI: 95% CI: 1.3, 3.5

Leukemia survivors had a higher risk of preterm birth and low birth weight in their first live singleton birth conceived after diagnosis.

Effect: decline; RR=2.1; CI: 95% CI: 1.3, 3.5

Leukemia survivors had a higher risk of preterm birth and low birth weight in their first live singleton birth conceived after diagnosis.

Effect: decline; RR=2.1; CI: 95% CI: 1.3, 3.5

Leukemia survivors had a higher risk of preterm birth and low birth weight in their first live singleton birth conceived after diagnosis.

Effect: decline; RR=2.1; CI: 95% CI: 1.3, 3.5

Leukemia survivors had a higher risk of preterm birth and low birth weight in their first live singleton birth conceived after diagnosis.

Effect: decline; RR=2.1; CI: 95% CI: 1.3, 3.5

Leukemia survivors had a higher risk of preterm birth and low birth weight in their first live singleton birth conceived after diagnosis.

Effect: decline; RR=2.1; CI: 95% CI: 1.3, 3.5

Leukemia survivors had a higher risk of preterm birth and low birth weight in their first live singleton birth conceived after diagnosis.

Effect: decline; RR=2.1; CI: 95% CI: 1.3, 3.5

Leukemia survivors had a higher risk of preterm birth and low birth weight in their first live singleton birth conceived after diagnosis.

Effect: decline; RR=2.1; CI: 95% CI: 1.3, 3.5

Leukemia survivors had a higher risk of preterm birth and low birth weight in their first live singleton birth conceived after diagnosis.

Effect: decline; RR=2.1; CI: 95% CI: 1.3, 3.5

Leukemia survivors had a higher risk of preterm birth and low birth weight in their first live singleton birth conceived after diagnosis.

Effect: decline; RR=2.1; CI: 95% CI: 1.3, 3.5

Leukemia survivors had a higher risk of preterm birth and low birth weight in their first live singleton birth conceived after diagnosis.

Effect: decline; RR=2.1; CI: 95% CI: 1.3, 3.5

Leukemia survivors had a higher risk of preterm birth and low birth weight in their first live singleton birth conceived after diagnosis.

Effect: decline; RR=2.1; CI: 95% CI: 1.3, 3.5

Leukemia survivors had a higher risk of preterm birth and low birth weight in their first live singleton birth conceived after diagnosis.

Effect: decline; RR=2.1; CI: 95% CI: 1.3, 3.5

Leukemia survivors had a higher risk of preterm birth and low birth weight in their first live singleton birth conceived after diagnosis.

Effect: decline; RR=2.1; CI: 95% CI: 1.3, 3.5

Long-term survivors of childhood ALL had significantly LOWER rates of Conduct Disorder (0.6% vs 10.9%) and Major Depressive Disorder (1.3% vs 15.4%) compared to the general population, suggesting prot

Effect: improvement; Conduct Disorder: 0.6% vs 10.9% expected; MDD: 1.3% vs 15.4% expected; CI: 95% CI 0.0-3.5% (Conduct Disorder); 95% CI 0.2-4.6% (MDD)

Long-term survivors of childhood ALL had significantly LOWER rates of Conduct Disorder (0.6% vs 10.9%) and Major Depressive Disorder (1.3% vs 15.4%) compared to the general population, suggesting prot

Effect: improvement; Conduct Disorder: 0.6% vs 10.9% expected; MDD: 1.3% vs 15.4% expected; CI: 95% CI 0.0-3.5% (Conduct Disorder); 95% CI 0.2-4.6% (MDD)

Long-term survivors of childhood ALL had significantly LOWER rates of Conduct Disorder (0.6% vs 10.9%) and Major Depressive Disorder (1.3% vs 15.4%) compared to the general population, suggesting prot

Effect: improvement; Conduct Disorder: 0.6% vs 10.9% expected; MDD: 1.3% vs 15.4% expected; CI: 95% CI 0.0-3.5% (Conduct Disorder); 95% CI 0.2-4.6% (MDD)

Long-term survivors of childhood ALL had significantly LOWER rates of Conduct Disorder (0.6% vs 10.9%) and Major Depressive Disorder (1.3% vs 15.4%) compared to the general population, suggesting prot

Effect: improvement; Conduct Disorder: 0.6% vs 10.9% expected; MDD: 1.3% vs 15.4% expected; CI: 95% CI 0.0-3.5% (Conduct Disorder); 95% CI 0.2-4.6% (MDD)

Long-term survivors of childhood ALL had significantly LOWER rates of Conduct Disorder (0.6% vs 10.9%) and Major Depressive Disorder (1.3% vs 15.4%) compared to the general population, suggesting prot

Effect: improvement; Conduct Disorder: 0.6% vs 10.9% expected; MDD: 1.3% vs 15.4% expected; CI: 95% CI 0.0-3.5% (Conduct Disorder); 95% CI 0.2-4.6% (MDD)

Long-term survivors of childhood ALL had significantly LOWER rates of Conduct Disorder (0.6% vs 10.9%) and Major Depressive Disorder (1.3% vs 15.4%) compared to the general population, suggesting prot

Effect: improvement; Conduct Disorder: 0.6% vs 10.9% expected; MDD: 1.3% vs 15.4% expected; CI: 95% CI 0.0-3.5% (Conduct Disorder); 95% CI 0.2-4.6% (MDD)

Long-term survivors of childhood ALL had significantly LOWER rates of Conduct Disorder (0.6% vs 10.9%) and Major Depressive Disorder (1.3% vs 15.4%) compared to the general population, suggesting prot

Effect: improvement; Conduct Disorder: 0.6% vs 10.9% expected; MDD: 1.3% vs 15.4% expected; CI: 95% CI 0.0-3.5% (Conduct Disorder); 95% CI 0.2-4.6% (MDD)

Long-term survivors of childhood ALL had significantly LOWER rates of Conduct Disorder (0.6% vs 10.9%) and Major Depressive Disorder (1.3% vs 15.4%) compared to the general population, suggesting prot

Effect: improvement; Conduct Disorder: 0.6% vs 10.9% expected; MDD: 1.3% vs 15.4% expected; CI: 95% CI 0.0-3.5% (Conduct Disorder); 95% CI 0.2-4.6% (MDD)

Long-term survivors of childhood ALL had significantly LOWER rates of Conduct Disorder (0.6% vs 10.9%) and Major Depressive Disorder (1.3% vs 15.4%) compared to the general population, suggesting prot

Effect: improvement; Conduct Disorder: 0.6% vs 10.9% expected; MDD: 1.3% vs 15.4% expected; CI: 95% CI 0.0-3.5% (Conduct Disorder); 95% CI 0.2-4.6% (MDD)

Long-term survivors of childhood ALL had significantly LOWER rates of Conduct Disorder (0.6% vs 10.9%) and Major Depressive Disorder (1.3% vs 15.4%) compared to the general population, suggesting prot

Effect: improvement; Conduct Disorder: 0.6% vs 10.9% expected; MDD: 1.3% vs 15.4% expected; CI: 95% CI 0.0-3.5% (Conduct Disorder); 95% CI 0.2-4.6% (MDD)

Long-term survivors of childhood ALL had significantly LOWER rates of Conduct Disorder (0.6% vs 10.9%) and Major Depressive Disorder (1.3% vs 15.4%) compared to the general population, suggesting prot

Effect: improvement; Conduct Disorder: 0.6% vs 10.9% expected; MDD: 1.3% vs 15.4% expected; CI: 95% CI 0.0-3.5% (Conduct Disorder); 95% CI 0.2-4.6% (MDD)

Long-term survivors of childhood ALL had significantly LOWER rates of Conduct Disorder (0.6% vs 10.9%) and Major Depressive Disorder (1.3% vs 15.4%) compared to the general population, suggesting prot

Effect: improvement; Conduct Disorder: 0.6% vs 10.9% expected; MDD: 1.3% vs 15.4% expected; CI: 95% CI 0.0-3.5% (Conduct Disorder); 95% CI 0.2-4.6% (MDD)

Long-term survivors of childhood ALL had significantly LOWER rates of Conduct Disorder (0.6% vs 10.9%) and Major Depressive Disorder (1.3% vs 15.4%) compared to the general population, suggesting prot

Effect: improvement; Conduct Disorder: 0.6% vs 10.9% expected; MDD: 1.3% vs 15.4% expected; CI: 95% CI 0.0-3.5% (Conduct Disorder); 95% CI 0.2-4.6% (MDD)

Long-term survivors of childhood ALL had significantly LOWER rates of Conduct Disorder (0.6% vs 10.9%) and Major Depressive Disorder (1.3% vs 15.4%) compared to the general population, suggesting prot

Effect: improvement; Conduct Disorder: 0.6% vs 10.9% expected; MDD: 1.3% vs 15.4% expected; CI: 95% CI 0.0-3.5% (Conduct Disorder); 95% CI 0.2-4.6% (MDD)

Long-term survivors of childhood ALL had significantly LOWER rates of Conduct Disorder (0.6% vs 10.9%) and Major Depressive Disorder (1.3% vs 15.4%) compared to the general population, suggesting prot

Effect: improvement; Conduct Disorder: 0.6% vs 10.9% expected; MDD: 1.3% vs 15.4% expected; CI: 95% CI 0.0-3.5% (Conduct Disorder); 95% CI 0.2-4.6% (MDD)

Long-term survivors of childhood ALL had significantly LOWER rates of Conduct Disorder (0.6% vs 10.9%) and Major Depressive Disorder (1.3% vs 15.4%) compared to the general population, suggesting prot

Effect: improvement; Conduct Disorder: 0.6% vs 10.9% expected; MDD: 1.3% vs 15.4% expected; CI: 95% CI 0.0-3.5% (Conduct Disorder); 95% CI 0.2-4.6% (MDD)

Long-term survivors of childhood ALL had significantly LOWER rates of Conduct Disorder (0.6% vs 10.9%) and Major Depressive Disorder (1.3% vs 15.4%) compared to the general population, suggesting prot

Effect: improvement; Conduct Disorder: 0.6% vs 10.9% expected; MDD: 1.3% vs 15.4% expected; CI: 95% CI 0.0-3.5% (Conduct Disorder); 95% CI 0.2-4.6% (MDD)

Long-term survivors of childhood ALL had significantly LOWER rates of Conduct Disorder (0.6% vs 10.9%) and Major Depressive Disorder (1.3% vs 15.4%) compared to the general population, suggesting prot

Effect: improvement; Conduct Disorder: 0.6% vs 10.9% expected; MDD: 1.3% vs 15.4% expected; CI: 95% CI 0.0-3.5% (Conduct Disorder); 95% CI 0.2-4.6% (MDD)

Long-term survivors of childhood ALL had significantly LOWER rates of Conduct Disorder (0.6% vs 10.9%) and Major Depressive Disorder (1.3% vs 15.4%) compared to the general population, suggesting prot

Effect: improvement; Conduct Disorder: 0.6% vs 10.9% expected; MDD: 1.3% vs 15.4% expected; CI: 95% CI 0.0-3.5% (Conduct Disorder); 95% CI 0.2-4.6% (MDD)

Long-term survivors of childhood ALL had significantly LOWER rates of Conduct Disorder (0.6% vs 10.9%) and Major Depressive Disorder (1.3% vs 15.4%) compared to the general population, suggesting prot

Effect: improvement; Conduct Disorder: 0.6% vs 10.9% expected; MDD: 1.3% vs 15.4% expected; CI: 95% CI 0.0-3.5% (Conduct Disorder); 95% CI 0.2-4.6% (MDD)

Long-term survivors of childhood ALL had significantly LOWER rates of Conduct Disorder (0.6% vs 10.9%) and Major Depressive Disorder (1.3% vs 15.4%) compared to the general population, suggesting prot

Effect: improvement; Conduct Disorder: 0.6% vs 10.9% expected; MDD: 1.3% vs 15.4% expected; CI: 95% CI 0.0-3.5% (Conduct Disorder); 95% CI 0.2-4.6% (MDD)

Long-term survivors of childhood ALL had significantly LOWER rates of Conduct Disorder (0.6% vs 10.9%) and Major Depressive Disorder (1.3% vs 15.4%) compared to the general population, suggesting prot

Effect: improvement; Conduct Disorder: 0.6% vs 10.9% expected; MDD: 1.3% vs 15.4% expected; CI: 95% CI 0.0-3.5% (Conduct Disorder); 95% CI 0.2-4.6% (MDD)

Long-term survivors of childhood ALL had significantly LOWER rates of Conduct Disorder (0.6% vs 10.9%) and Major Depressive Disorder (1.3% vs 15.4%) compared to the general population, suggesting prot

Effect: improvement; Conduct Disorder: 0.6% vs 10.9% expected; MDD: 1.3% vs 15.4% expected; CI: 95% CI 0.0-3.5% (Conduct Disorder); 95% CI 0.2-4.6% (MDD)