ArticlePloS one2025
Prevalence and trends of major congenital anomalies in Brazil: A study from 2011 to 2020.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Temporal trends and maternal factors associated with congenital anomalies among live births in São Paulo, Brazil: a population-based study, 2015-2023.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
- Epidemiology of congenital heart defects in live births: findings from a study in Southern Brazil.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2026Article
- Scientific production on health inequalities using the Brazilian Information System on Live Births: a scoping review.Cadernos de saude publica · 2026Article
- Temporal and spatial trends in isolated gastroschisis: a population-based study in a middle-income setting.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2026Article
- Epidemiological profiles and intervention strategies of limb deformities in China: A nationwide study based on the largest orthopedic database in China.Journal of orthopaedic translation · 2025Article
- Congenital heart disease: epidemiological profile of live births, geographical distribution and temporal trends in Brazil from 2012 to 2022.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2025Observational
- The Impact of Advanced Maternal Age on Pregnancy Complications and Neonatal Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCongenital anomalies contribute significantly to morbidity and mortality among newborns and infants. In Brazil, the estimated prevalence of malformations in newborns is < 1%, which is comparatively lower than that recorded in other regions worldwide. This study aimed to analyze the prevalence of congenital anomalies in Brazil over a 10-year period and to identify potential associations of this prevalence with socioeconomic, gestational, and regional factors by performing an analysis using data sourced from the Live Birth Information System (Sistema de Informações sobre os Nascidos Vivos - SINASC) covering the period from 2011 to 2020.
methodsFrom a total population of 29,025,461 live births, we included a cohort of 240,405 newborns with congenital anomalies. For the purpose of this study, we categorized newborns with congenital anomalies into two groups: one group with newborns with a single major malformation and another group with newborns with multiple major malformations (minor malformations not considered).
resultsThe prevalence of congenital anomalies was 8.0 per 1,000 live births, with variations across different years and regions within the country. The Southeast region of Brazil, with the highest human development index, displayed the highest prevalence of congenital anomalies. The most frequent congenital anomalies were limb deformities (29.7%), neural tube defects (14.7%), and heart defects (11.6%).
conclusionThe prevalence of major congenital anomalies in Brazil during the study period varied with the geographic region and was lower than that in developed nations, likely due to lower prenatal detection rates and underreporting.
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.