ArticleJournal of tropical pediatrics2016
Cytogenetic Studies of Rwandan Pediatric Patients Presenting with Global Developmental Delay, Intellectual Disability and/or Multiple Congenital Anomalies.
Article in Journal of tropical pediatrics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genetic aetiology of global developmental delay and intellectual disability in Africa: a scoping review.Frontiers in genetics · 2026Pooled it
- Lived experiences of parents of children with genetic and neurodevelopmental disorders accessing genetic services in Rwanda: barriers and enablers.Journal of community genetics · 2026Article
- Feeding Experiences Among Caregivers of Children With Down Syndrome in Rwanda: A Qualitative Exploratory Study.Public health challenges · 2026Article
- A Cytogenetic Study of Turkish Children with Global Developmental Delay.Journal of pediatric genetics · 2024Article
- The Etiological Profile of Global Developmental Delay at a Tertiary Care Hospital in India: An Observational Study.Cureus · 2023Article
- Genetic diagnostic approach to intellectual disability and multiple congenital anomalies in Indonesia.Intractable & rare diseases research · 2023Article
- The burden, prevention and care of infants and children with congenital anomalies in sub-Saharan Africa: A scoping review.PLOS global public health · 2023Article
- A comprehensive clinical and genetic study in 127 patients with ID in Kinshasa, DR Congo.American journal of medical genetics. Part A · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Global developmental delay (GDD) is defined as a significant delay in two or more developmental domains: gross or fine motor, speech/language, cognitive, social/personal and activities of daily living. Many of these children will go on to be diagnosed with intellectual disability (ID), which is most commonly defined as having an IQ <75 in addition to impairment in adaptive functioning. Cytogenetic studies have been performed in 664 Rwandan pediatric patients presenting GDD/ID and/or multiple congenital abnormalities (MCA). Karyotype analysis was performed in all patients and revealed 260 chromosomal abnormalities. The most frequent chromosomal abnormality was Down syndrome and then Edward syndrome and Patau syndrome. Other identified chromosomal abnormalities included 47,XX,+del(9)(q11), 46,XY,del(13)(q34) and 46,XX,der(22)t(10;22)(p10;p10)mat. In conclusion, our results highlight the high frequency of cytogenetically detectable abnormalities in this series, with implications for the burden on the healthcare. This study demonstrates the importance of cytogenetic analysis in patients with GDD/ID and MCA.
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.