ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2021
Prevalence of congenital microcephaly and its risk factors in an area at risk of Zika outbreaks.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genetic architecture and prognostic significance of suspected fetal microcephaly: evidence from prenatal exome sequencing in a large prospective cohort.Human genomics · 2026Article
- Incidence of congenital microcephaly in the Czech Republic: The effect of maternal age.Journal of applied biomedicine · 2025Article
- Microcephaly in Infants: A Retrospective Cohort Study from TurkeyJournal of clinical research in pediatric endocrinology · 2024Article
- Microcephaly and Associated Risk Factors in Newborns: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Study.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2022Review
- Prevalence of microcephaly and Zika virus infection in a pregnancy cohort in Kenya, 2017-2019.BMC medicine · 2022Article
- Article
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 at 5 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPrevalence of neonatal microcephaly in populations without Zika-epidemics is sparse. The study aimed to report baseline prevalence of congenital microcephaly and its relationship with prenatal factors in an area at risk of Zika outbreak.
methodsThis study included singletons born after 24 gestational weeks in 2017-2018 at four hospitals in Guangzhou, China. Microcephaly was defined as a head circumference at birth >3SD below the mean for sex and gestational age. Prevalence of microcephaly was estimated by binomial exact method. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the associations of microcephaly with prenatal factors. The population attributable fraction (PAF) for associated risk factors was calculated.
resultsOf 46,610 live births included, 154 (3.3, 95% CI 2.8-3.9 per 1000 live births) microcephalies were identified. Maternal hepatitis B virus carriers (HBV, OR 1.80, 95% CI 1.05-3.10) and primipara (OR 2.68, 95% CI 1.89-3.81) had higher risk of having a microcephalic baby. Higher prevalence of microcephaly was observed in women who had premature labor (OR 1.98, 95% CI 1.17-3.34) and had a baby with fetal growth restriction (OR 16.38, 95% CI 11.81-22.71). Four identified factors (HBV, primiparity, preterm labor, and fetal growth restriction) contributed to 66.4% of the risk of microcephaly.
conclusionsThe prevalence of microcephaly in Guangzhou was higher than expected. This study identified four prenatal risk factors that, together, contributed to two-thirds of the increased risk of microcephaly. This is the first reported association between maternal HBV carrier status and microcephaly.
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.