ReviewPediatric reports2023
Prevalence and Pattern of Birth Defects in Saudi Arabia: A Systematic Review of Observational Studies.
Review in Pediatric reports, 2023. 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.
- Spectrum of congenital anomalies detected through anatomy ultrasound at a referral hospital in Ghana.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- Live birth prevalence of major congenital anomalies in the United Arab Emirates.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Evidence of the correlation between air pollution and different types of birth defects: based on a distribution-lag non-linear model.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- National strategies for screening neural tube defects in Saudi Arabia: activating prevention and early intervention.Frontiers in public health · 2025Review
- Community Awareness and Perceptions of Genitourinary Malformations: A Cross-Sectional Survey Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Examining the Prevalence of Congenital Anomalies in Newborns: A Cross-Sectional Study at a Tertiary Care Maternity Hospital in Saudi Arabia.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionBirth defects are a significant concern since they can lead to permanent disability and death. This study comprehensively reviews the prevalence and patterns of birth defects in Saudi Arabia.
methodsA systematic analysis of the literature retrieved from three databases (Pub Med, Science Direct, and the Saudi digital library) published between 1989 and 2022 was performed. Observational studies that addressed the prevalence and patterns of birth defects in Saudi Arabia were chosen based on the eligibility criteria, while systematic reviews, review articles, non-relevant articles, and studies that did not fulfill the eligibility criteria were excluded. Quality and risk of bias were evaluated based on the JBI and GRADE tools, respectively.
resultsWe identified 26 eligible publications of 1277 records that included 297,668 patients from different regions of Saudi Arabia. The highest overall prevalence of birth defects was 46.5 per 1000 live births compared to a lowest rate of 8.6 per 1000 in one study. Several studies have reported positive associations of consanguinity, maternal folic acid supplementation, family history of birth defects or genetic abnormalities, and maternal co-morbidities. The most frequent birth defects include cardiac, genitourinary, craniofacial, and nervous system defects.
conclusionRobust findings have improved our understanding of the prevalence and pattern of birth defects in Saudi Arabia. Importantly, future studies will likely require multicenter collaboration to arrive at appropriate sample sizes in the context of the effects of risk factors on elevated prevalence. Furthermore, quantitative data require careful evaluation in more complex statistical models.
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.