Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35345074›Full record

ArticleThe Indian journal of medical research2021

Prevalence & spectrum of congenital anomalies at a tertiary care centre in north India over 20 years (1998-2017).

Jogender Kumar, Shiv Sajan Saini, Venkataseshan Sundaram, Kanya Mukhopadhyay, Sourabh Dutta, Nandita Kakkar, Praveen Kumar

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Indian journal of medical research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Burden of neural tube defects in India: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2024
    Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Genetic and environmental risk of congenital anomaly.Asian biomedicine : research, reviews and news · 2022
    Article
  14. Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jogender KumarDepartment of Pediatrics, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education & Research, Chandigarh, India.
Shiv Sajan SainiDepartment of Pediatrics, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education & Research, Chandigarh, India.
Venkataseshan SundaramDepartment of Pediatrics, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education & Research, Chandigarh, India.
Kanya MukhopadhyayDepartment of Pediatrics, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education & Research, Chandigarh, India.
Sourabh DuttaDepartment of Pediatrics, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education & Research, Chandigarh, India.
Nandita KakkarDepartment of Histopathology, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education & Research, Chandigarh, India.
Praveen KumarDepartment of Pediatrics, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education & Research, Chandigarh, India.
Chandigarh University · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background & objectives: Congenital anomalies lead to significant morbidity and mortality. Systematically published data on the prevalence and spectrum of congenital anomalies from India are scarce. This study was aimed to ascertain the prevalence, spectrum, trend, and outcome of congenital anomalies at a tertiary care centre in north India over two decades. Methods: Electronic records of all live births from January 1998 to December 2017 were retrieved, and the neonates with congenital anomaly were included in this retrospective analysis. International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, tenth revision (ICD-10) was used for uniformity and international comparison. The further sub-categorization was done as per the WHO birth defects surveillance manual. The prevalence of individual as well as overall congenital anomalies was calculated. Run charts were used to analyze the trends. Results: In the two decades studied (1998-2017), there were 86850 live births, of which 1578 [1.82%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.73-1.91%] neonates had a major congenital anomaly. The overall prevalence of anomalies was 182 (95% CI: 173-191) per 10,000 live births. Malformation of the circulatory system was the most common (28.0%) followed by musculoskeletal (18.6%) and urinary system (14.3%). Congenital anomaly-related death rate was 6.78 per 1000 live births. No significant trend was observed in the annual prevalence, individual malformations or contribution of congenital anomalies to overall mortality over the two decades. Interpretation & conclusions: Our results showed a high prevalence of congenital anomalies which could be responsible for significant mortality, warranting the need for a national surveillance programme and birth defect services. It is important to have a national database to know the overall burden and spectrum of congenital anomalies in the country.

Indexed as

PrevalenceHumansIndiaInfant, NewbornRetrospective StudiesTertiary Care CentersBirth defectscongenital anomaliesmalformationmortalityneonatestillbirth

Identifiers

PMID35345074
PMCPMC9131793
OpenAlexW4285521973

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.