ArticleLancet regional health. Americas2022
Crossing birth and mortality data as a clue for prevalence of congenital diaphragmatic hernia in Sao Paulo State: A cross sectional study.
Article in Lancet regional health. Americas, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prenatal diagnosis of congenital diaphragmatic hernia with mosaicism of chromosomes 17q and 18q in Iran: a case report.Journal of medical case reports · 2026Article
- How Epigenetics Bridges Genes and Environment: A Multiomics Evidence Chain in Congenital Diaphragmatic Hernia.Birth defects research · 2026Review
- Neonatal mortality of live births with congenital diaphragmatic hernia in São Paulo State, Brazil: Failure of care?Revista paulista de pediatria : orgao oficial da Sociedade de Pediatria de Sao Paulo · 2025Article
- Congenital diaphragmatic hernia in a middle-income country: Persistent high lethality during a 12-year period.PloS one · 2023Article
- The Global Burden of Major Gastrointestinal Anomalies: A Global, Systematic Review of Gastrointestinal Anomaly Birth Prevalence.Sage open pediatricsReview
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH) is a severe embryological defect that causes pulmonary hypoplasia and hypertension. The prevalence and mortality rate of CDH varies around the world and little information is available about CDH in Latin America. Our aim was to estimate the general prevalence, mortality rate, prevalence of associated anomalies and features related to the outcomes of CDH in newborns from São Paulo state, Brazil. Methods: Population-based cross-sectional study based on data gathered from the Live Births Information System (SINASC) and the Mortality Information System (SIM) of children born in São Paulo state between January 1st, 2006, and December 31st, 2017. Findings: From 7,311,074 total survival discharges between 2006 and 2017, 1,155 were CDH-related, resulting in a prevalence rate of 1:6329 (95%CI = 1/6715 - 1/5984) and a mortality rate of 63·72% (95%CI = 60.95 - 66.50), 510 presented complex associated anomalies (44·15%). Maternal data showed higher prevalence among older mothers (older than 35 years old: 2·13 per 10,000) and, also, women with more years of schooling (higher than 12 years: 1·99 per 10,000). Presence of associated anomalies (95%CI = 5.69-11.10), 1-min Apgar (95%CI = 1.44-2.95), maternal schooling (95%CI = 1.06-2.43) and birth weight (95%CI = 1.04-2.26) were the most significant features associated with mortality. Interpretation: There was 1 CDH case for every 6329 newborns in São Paulo and the mortality rate among those cases was 63·72% - a high rate compared to other countries. Funding: This study didn't receive any specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
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.