Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21770020›Full record

Trial reportBirth defects research. Part A, Clinical and molecular teratology2011

A description of congenital anomalies among infants in Entebbe, Uganda.

Juliet Ndibazza, Swaib Lule, Margaret Nampijja, Harriet Mpairwe, Gloria Oduru, Molly Kiggundu, Miriam Akello, Lawrence Muhangi, Alison M Elliott

Abstract readClinical TrialRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Birth defects research. Part A, Clinical and molecular teratology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Juliet NdibazzaMRC/UVRI Uganda Research Unit on AIDS, Uganda Virus Research Institute, Entebbe, Uganda. Juliet.Ndibazza@mrcuganda.org
Swaib Lule
Margaret Nampijja
Harriet Mpairwe
Gloria Oduru
Molly Kiggundu
Miriam Akello
Lawrence Muhangi
Alison M Elliott

Funding

Wellcome Trust 064693Wellcome Trust 079110
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundData on congenital anomalies from developing countries of the sub-Saharan region are scarce. However, it is important to have comprehensive and reliable data on the description and prevalence of congenital anomalies to allow surveillance and the implementation of appropriate public health strategies for prevention and management. In this study, we describe the profile of congenital anomalies seen in a birth cohort in Entebbe, Uganda.

methodsCongenital anomalies were defined as any structural defect present at birth. Pregnant women were recruited to the cohort between 2003 and 2005. Defects present at birth were recorded by the midwife at delivery and by physicians at the routine six-week postnatal visit and at illness-related visits until 1 year of life. The anomalies were classified by organ system according to the 10th version of the World Health Organization International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10).

resultsThere were 180 infants with a congenital anomaly among 2365 births. The most commonly affected systems were the musculoskeletal (42.7 per 1000 births) and skin (16.1 per 1000 births). The prevalence of major anomalies was 20.3 per 1000 births; 1.7 per 1000 births for cardiac anomalies and 1.3 per 1000 births for neural system anomalies. Forty (22%) of the congenital anomalies were identified at birth, 131 (73%) at the 6-week postnatal visit, and nine (5%) at illness-related visits.

conclusionCongenital anomalies are common in developing countries. Establishment of comprehensive databases for surveillance would be helpful for surveillance of effects of new exposures, for prevention, management, and health care planning.

Indexed as

Congenital AbnormalitiesDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansInfantInfant, NewbornMalePregnancyPrevalenceUganda

Identifiers

PMID21770020
PMCPMC3272344

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.