ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2025
Relative and attributable risks of neurological and perinatal adverse outcomes among children with and without prenatal Zika virus exposure in Northeast Brazil: A prospective cohort study (2015-2018).
Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparing Adverse Health Outcomes in Infants Born to Women Monoinfected with Zika Virus or Infected with Both Zika and Chikungunya Viruses during Pregnancy: A Prospective Cohort Study in Pernambuco, Brazil (2015-2017).The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2026Article
- 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
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
32 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAlthough there has been substantial progress in the characterization of Congenital Zika Syndrome, the lack of a control group in the majority of published studies on Zika virus (ZIKV) infections during pregnancy limits our understanding of, first, the magnitude by which prenatal ZIKV exposure may increase risks of adverse outcomes for offspring and, second, the fraction of abnormalities that are attributable to this exposure.
methodsTo overcome this limitation, this study harmonized and integrated data collected prospectively in Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil, from offspring of ZIKV-exposed women in the Microcephaly Epidemic Research Group (MERG) Pregnant Women Cohort and from offspring of ZIKV-unexposed women in the Zika in Infants and Pregnancy (ZIP) Study. We compared the data to estimate the relative risk (RR) and attributable risk percent (AR%) of: (i) adverse birth outcomes including low birth weight (LBW), prematurity and small for gestational age (SGA) and (ii) developmental abnormalities including microcephaly and neurological, ophthalmological, audiological, and neuroimaging alterations.
findingsWe observed similar odds of adverse birth outcomes and ophthalmological deficits in ZIKV-exposed and unexposed children. However, as compared to ZIKV-unexposed children, ZIKV-exposed children presented with markedly increased risks of microcephaly (RR, 95%-CI: 3.61, 1.70 to 7.63 AR 72%), neurological abnormalities (RR, 95%-CI: 5.64, 3.04 to 10.47.79AR 82%), audiological screening failures (RR, 95%-CI: 9.20, 2.59 to 32.69 AR 89%), and neuroimaging abnormalities (RR, 95%-CI: 22.06, 2.90 to 167.5; AR 95%). The risk of having concurrent abnormalities was lower than the risk of having just one abnormality. Our results provide new insights into the relative and attributable risks related to prenatal ZIKV exposure and demonstrate that, overall, the risks of congenital abnormalities are elevated among children exposed to ZIKV during pregnancy compared to their ZIKV-unexposed peers.
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.