ArticleSpine2013
Analysis of maternal risk factors associated with congenital vertebral malformations.
Article in Spine, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Long-Term Outcomes of Prenatally Diagnosed Fetal Hemivertebra: A 15-Year Single-Center Review.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Maternal risk factors for congenital vertebral formation and mixed defects: A population-based case-control study.Journal of children's orthopaedics · 2024Article
- A comprehensive review of the diagnosis and management of congenital scoliosis.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
STUDY
designA retrospective medical record review of cases with congenital vertebral malformations (CVMs) and controls with normal spine morphology.
objectiveTo determine the relative contribution of maternal environmental factors (MEFs) during pregnancy to CVM development. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: CVMs represent defects in formation and segmentation of somites occurring with an estimated incidence of between 0.13 and 0.50 per 1000 live births. CVMs may be associated with various phenotypes and represent significant morbidity due to pain and cosmetic disfigurement.
methodsA multicenter retrospective medical record review of 229 cases with CVM and 267 controls with normal spine morphology between the ages of 1 and 50 years was performed to obtain the odds ratio (OR) of MEF related to CVM among cases versus controls. An imputation-based analysis was performed in which subjects with no documentation of MEF history were treated as "no maternal exposure." Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to calculate the OR.
resultsOf the 229 total cases, 104 cases had single or multiple CVMs without additional congenital malformations (group 1) and 125 cases had single or multiple CVMs and additional congenital malformations (group 2). Nineteen percent of total cases had an identified MEF. The OR for MEF history for group 1 was 6.0 (95% confidence interval, 2.4-15.1; P < 0.001) in the univariate analysis. The OR for MEF history in group 2 was 9.1 (95% confidence interval, 3.8-21.6, P < 0.001) in the univariate analysis. The results were confirmed in the multivariate analysis after adjusting for age, sex, and institution.
conclusionsThese results support a hypothesis for an association between these MEFs during pregnancy and CVM and have implications for development of prevention strategies. Further prospective studies are needed to quantify association between CVMs and specific MEF. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.