Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32986711›Full record

SynthesisPLoS medicine2020

Long-term survival of children born with congenital anomalies: A systematic review and meta-analysis of population-based studies.

Svetlana V Glinianaia, Joan K Morris, Kate E Best, Michele Santoro, Alessio Coi, Annarita Armaroli, Judith Rankin

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PLoS medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 61 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
61citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Life expectancy in open spina bifida.Developmental medicine and child neurology · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Observational
  17. Screening for Neurocognitive Deficits in Pediatrics-the Clinical Utility of the Pediatric Perceived Cognitive Functioning item bank.Archives of clinical neuropsychology : the official journal of the National Academy of Neuropsychologists · 2025
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Comparison of open fetal, fetoscopic and postnatal surgical repair for open spina bifida: decision analysis.Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2025
    Article
  20. When external factors limit care options for complex fetal and neonatal diagnoses.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2025
    Review

1 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Svetlana V GlinianaiaPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-6690-4975
Joan K MorrisPopulation Health Research Institute, St George's, University of London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7164-612X
Kate E BestPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-4663-7141
Michele SantoroInstitute of Clinical Physiology, National Research Council, Pisa, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-0676-3036
Alessio CoiInstitute of Clinical Physiology, National Research Council, Pisa, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-9816-3144
Annarita ArmaroliCenter for Clinical and Epidemiological Research, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-2918-5996
Judith RankinPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-5355-454X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFollowing a reduction in global child mortality due to communicable diseases, the relative contribution of congenital anomalies to child mortality is increasing. Although infant survival of children born with congenital anomalies has improved for many anomaly types in recent decades, there is less evidence on survival beyond infancy. We aimed to systematically review, summarise, and quantify the existing population-based data on long-term survival of individuals born with specific major congenital anomalies and examine the factors associated with survival. METHODS AND

findingsSeven electronic databases (Medline, Embase, Scopus, PsycINFO, CINAHL, ProQuest Natural, and Biological Science Collections), reference lists, and citations of the included articles for studies published 1 January 1995 to 30 April 2020 were searched. Screening for eligibility, data extraction, and quality appraisal were performed in duplicate. We included original population-based studies that reported long-term survival (beyond 1 year of life) of children born with a major congenital anomaly with the follow-up starting from birth that were published in the English language as peer-reviewed papers. Studies on congenital heart defects (CHDs) were excluded because of a recent systematic review of population-based studies of CHD survival. Meta-analysis was performed to pool survival estimates, accounting for trends over time. Of 10,888 identified articles, 55 (n = 367,801 live births) met the inclusion criteria and were summarised narratively, 41 studies (n = 54,676) investigating eight congenital anomaly types (spina bifida [n = 7,422], encephalocele [n = 1,562], oesophageal atresia [n = 6,303], biliary atresia [n = 3,877], diaphragmatic hernia [n = 6,176], gastroschisis [n = 4,845], Down syndrome by presence of CHD [n = 22,317], and trisomy 18 [n = 2,174]) were included in the meta-analysis. These studies covered birth years from 1970 to 2015. Survival for children with spina bifida, oesophageal atresia, biliary atresia, diaphragmatic hernia, gastroschisis, and Down syndrome with an associated CHD has significantly improved over time, with the pooled odds ratios (ORs) of surviving per 10-year increase in birth year being OR = 1.34 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.24-1.46), OR = 1.50 (95% CI 1.38-1.62), OR = 1.62 (95% CI 1.28-2.05), OR = 1.57 (95% CI 1.37-1.81), OR = 1.24 (95% CI 1.02-1.5), and OR = 1.99 (95% CI 1.67-2.37), respectively (p < 0.001 for all, except for gastroschisis [p = 0.029]). There was no observed improvement for children with encephalocele (OR = 0.98, 95% CI 0.95-1.01, p = 0.19) and children with biliary atresia surviving with native liver (OR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.88-1.03, p = 0.26). The presence of additional structural anomalies, low birth weight, and earlier year of birth were the most commonly reported predictors of reduced survival for any congenital anomaly type. The main limitation of the meta-analysis was the small number of studies and the small size of the cohorts, which limited the predictive capabilities of the models resulting in wide confidence intervals.

conclusionsThis systematic review and meta-analysis summarises estimates of long-term survival associated with major congenital anomalies. We report a significant improvement in survival of children with specific congenital anomalies over the last few decades and predict survival estimates up to 20 years of age for those born in 2020. This information is important for the planning and delivery of specialised medical, social, and education services and for counselling affected families. This trial was registered on the PROSPERO database (CRD42017074675).

Indexed as

Live BirthAdultAge FactorsChildChild MortalityChild, PreschoolCongenital AbnormalitiesFemaleHumansInfantParturitionPregnancyRegistriesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID32986711
PMCPMC7521740

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.