Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32864479›Full record

SynthesisBMJ paediatrics open2020

Investigating the use of ultrasonography for the antenatal diagnosis of structural congenital anomalies in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review.

Stephanie Michele Goley, Sidonie Sakula-Barry, Nana Adofo-Ansong, Laurence Isaaya Ntawunga, Maame Tekyiwa Botchway, Ann Horton Kelly, Naomi Wright

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ paediatrics open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Prenatal ultrasound screening and congenital anomalies at birth by region: Pattern and distribution in Latvia.European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X · 2023
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Paediatric nephrology in under-resourced areas.Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2022
    Review
  19. Review
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

7 authors.

Stephanie Michele GoleyDepartment of Global Health & Social Medicine, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9998-7519
Sidonie Sakula-BarryHealth Information Department, World Cancer Research Fund, London, UK.
Nana Adofo-AnsongDepartment of Paediatrics, Mafikeng Provincial Hospital, Mafikeng, South Africa.
Laurence Isaaya NtawungaRwanda Spina Bifida and Hydrocephalus Relief, University of Rwanda, Kigali, Rwanda.
Maame Tekyiwa BotchwayDepartment of Paediatric Surgery, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg-Braamfontein, Gauteng, South Africa.
Ann Horton KellyDepartment of Global Health & Social Medicine, King's College London, London, UK.
Naomi WrightKing's Centre for Global Health and Health Partnerships, King's College London, London, UK.

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCongenital anomalies are the fifth leading cause of under-5 mortality globally. The greatest burden is faced by those in low/middle-income countries (LMICs), where over 95% of deaths occur. Many of these deaths may be preventable through antenatal diagnosis and early intervention. This systematic literature review investigates the use of antenatal ultrasound to diagnose congenital anomalies and improve the health outcomes of infants in LMICs.

methodsA systematic literature review was conducted using three search strings: (1) structural congenital anomalies; (2) LMICs; and (3) antenatal diagnosis. The search was conducted on the following databases: Medline, Embase, PubMed and the Cochrane Library. Title, abstract and full-text screening was undertaken in duplicate by two reviewers independently. Consensus among the wider authorship was sought for discrepancies. The primary analysis focused on the availability and effectiveness of antenatal ultrasound for diagnosing structural congenital anomalies. Secondary outcomes included neonatal morbidity and mortality, termination rates, referral rates for further antenatal care and training level of the ultrasonographer. Relevant policy data were sought.

resultsThe search produced 4062 articles; 97 were included in the review. The median percentage of women receiving an antenatal ultrasound examination was 50.0% in African studies and 90.7% in Asian studies (range 6.8%-98.8%). Median detection rates were: 16.7% Africa, 34.3% South America, 34.7% Asia and 47.3% Europe (range 0%-100%). The training level of the ultrasound provider may affect detection rates. Four articles compared morbidity and mortality outcomes, with inconclusive results. Significant variations in termination rates were found (0%-98.3%). No articles addressed referral rates.

conclusionAntenatal detection of congenital anomalies remains highly variable across LMICs and is particularly low in sub-Saharan Africa. Further research is required to investigate the role of antenatal diagnosis for improving survival from congenital anomalies in LMICs. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019105620.

Indexed as

congenital abnormneonatologyscreening

Identifiers

PMID32864479
PMCPMC7443309

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.