Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38577288›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2024

Consanguineous marriages, premarital screening, and genetic testing: a survey among Saudi university students.

Tahir Jameel, Mukhtiar Baig, Manal Abdulaziz Murad, Zohair Jamil Gazzaz, Youssof Mal, Wedyan Eid Alyoubi, Ghadi Hamed Alyoubi, Shoug Tawfiq Alaslani, Hanan Abdullah Alshuaibi, Ayesha Nawaz and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
6.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

11 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Tahir JameelDepartment of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Rabigh, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Mukhtiar BaigDepartment of Clinical Biochemistry, Faculty of Medicine Rabigh, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Manal Abdulaziz MuradDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine in Rabigh, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Zohair Jamil GazzazDepartment of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Rabigh, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Youssof MalDepartment of Clinical Biochemistry, Faculty of Medicine Rabigh, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Wedyan Eid AlyoubiMedical Students, Faculty of Medicine Rabigh, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Ghadi Hamed AlyoubiMedical Students, Faculty of Medicine Rabigh, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Shoug Tawfiq AlaslaniMedical Students, Faculty of Medicine Rabigh, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Hanan Abdullah AlshuaibiMedical Students, Faculty of Medicine Rabigh, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Ayesha NawazSHO, Gold Coast University Hospital, Southport, QLD, Australia.
Turki AlkaabiMedical Students, Faculty of Medicine Rabigh, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
King Abdulaziz University · SAGold Coast Hospital · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Marriage among cousins or close relatives, i.e., consanguinity, is prevalent in many parts of the world, especially the Muslim world. Across civilizations, cultural norms, religious beliefs, and economic factors affect consanguineous marriages (CMs); however, such marriages have social, genetic, and health repercussions. The present study investigated the university students' attitudes regarding CMs and factors influencing their attitudes at King Abdulaziz University (KAU), Jeddah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). Methods: This cross-sectional prospective study was conducted at KAU Jeddah in 2023. The questionnaire was distributed via electronic media (Emails, Facebook Messenger & WhatsApp). The convenience sampling technique was used to select participants, and descriptive and inferential statistics were used to analyze the data on SPSS-26. Results: A total of 1707 university students were part of the study (females, 1,198, 70.2%; males, 509, 29.8%). Almost half of the participants, 819 (48.0%), had parents with CMs. Most of the participants, 1,391 (81.5%), had CMs in the family. Half of the participants disagreed that parents consider marriage stable due to high compatibility and the same social relationship before and after marriage. About one-third of respondents said parents believe family marriage transmits cultural values and continuity and keeps wealth in the family. More than three-fourths of the participants stated that if marriage is arranged with first cousins, they will opt for genetic analysis (82.5%) and premarital counseling (85.2%). The personal attitudes of females ( Conclusion: The practice of CMs is still prevalent in Saudi culture, with almost half of the participants having CM parents and the majority reporting these marriages in their families. Personal attitudes toward CMs were extremely positive. Most students prefer genetic testing and premarital counseling if marrying first cousins. Gender, faculty, parental income, and educational background influenced participants' attitudes.

Indexed as

StudentsConsanguinityCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleProspective StudiesSaudi ArabiaSurveys and QuestionnairesUniversitiesconsanguinitygenetic disordersgenetic testingpremarital counselingsickle cell anemiasocial factorsthalassemia

Identifiers

PMID38577288
PMCPMC10993994
OpenAlexW4393037217

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.