ReviewIrish journal of medical science2016
A review of consanguinity in Ireland--estimation of frequency and approaches to mitigate risks.
Review in Irish journal of medical science, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Traveller mothers: Obstetric and neonatal outcomes in an Irish maternity unit.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026Article
- Consanguineous Marriage and the Psychopathology of Progeny: A Population-wide Data Linkage Study.JAMA psychiatry · 2018Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionOver half of marriages are consanguineous in some countries, and about 10 % of children worldwide have consanguineous parents. Perceived benefits of consanguineous marriage (CM) include preservation of tradition, stronger family ties, financial advantages, and bride protection. Potential harms include autosomal recessive disorders, complex congenital malformations, stillbirths, postnatal mortality. There have been no population-based data published on frequency of CM in Ireland since 1970.
methodsInternational prevalence figures and published estimates of CM were applied to 2011 Irish Census data to calculate the frequency of CM in at-risk groups. Searches of the published and grey literature were conducted to review evidence-based approaches to mitigate risks of CM and apply findings to the Irish context.
resultsThe estimated number of consanguineous couples has grown in subpopulations in Ireland in the past decade, particularly among Pakistanis (>967 couples), Nigerians (418-794 couples) and Indians (54-2099 couples). There are up to 3000 consanguineous couples in the Traveller community. Evidence for approaches to mitigate associated risks supports a three-stranded approach: family-centred genetics services, training and education of healthcare professionals (HCPs), community education programmes. DISCUSSION: Consanguineous couples desire accurate information for reproductive decisions, but may avoid hospital-based services due to language barriers, poor understanding, stigma. Uptake of genetic counselling and carrier testing is higher if a family-centred approach is provided, ideally through home visits in the couple's preferred language. Targeted education programmes enhance community awareness and have led to declines in CM elsewhere. Education of HCPs is necessary to clarify referral pathways, as many have exaggerated impressions of the genetic risks.
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.