ReviewJournal of community genetics2025
Birth defects reporting and surveillance in India: a narrative review.
Review in Journal of community genetics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Newborn screening for external congenital anomalies at three public hospitals in Karachi, Pakistan.BMJ paediatrics open · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mortality attributable to birth defects (congenital anomalies, congenital disorders) is increasing in low and middle-income countries, including India. Surveillance is essential to inform strategies to address these disorders. The objective of this narrative review was to document the birth defects surveillance/reporting systems in India, their current status, structures and reporting formats. The review used empirical analysis of retrieved literature to answer the framed research questions. Publications on birth defects surveillance in India was negligible. Website searches yielded information on two surveillance systems. The WHO South East Asia Region-Newborn-Birth Defects (SEAR-NBBD) surveillance for congenital disorders uses a non-representative sample of hospitals to conduct passive surveillance for eight congenital anomalies. The system has a hierarchy of quality control measures to assure data accuracy. The second system is a child screening and early intervention service (the Rashtriya Bal Swasthya Karyakram, RBSK), which reports data on nine birth defects among children screened at birth, in the first six weeks of life, and till 18 years of age. The RBSK uses existing community-based staff and competency-appropriate screening tools that incorporate defined referral routes to secondary or tertiary level of care. Data from neither of these systems is available in the public domain. The review identified that the strengths and weaknesses of both these systems can be utilized to put in place a potentially sustainable sentinel surveillance for monitoring birth defects in India.
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.