ArticleCureus2026
Assessing the Current Public Knowledge, Attitudes, and Perceptions Regarding Consanguineous Marriages in the United Arab Emirates.
Article in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and objective Consanguinity refers to the marital practice between individuals who share blood relations. It is commonly observed in the Middle East, particularly through first-cousin unions. Previous studies have associated consanguineous marriages with an increased risk of genetic disorders and higher infant mortality rates. Much of the research conducted in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) on consanguinity is either outdated or does not specifically address the knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of our target population. This study aimed to assess the knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of UAE adults regarding consanguinity and its genetic consequences. Methods This was a cross-sectional study using convenience sampling to target UAE adult residents. A 37-question online survey was created, piloted, and then shared on social media platforms in both English and Arabic. The participants' knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions regarding consanguinity, premarital testing, and genetic disorders were assessed. Data were analyzed using SPSS Statistics version 26 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY). Results The sample included 447 participants: 172 (38.5%) were men and 275 (61.5%) were women. Regarding nationality, 335 (74.9%) were non-local Arabs, 78 (17.4%) were Emirati nationals, and 34 (7.6%) were non-Arabs. Results show that 186 (41.6%) of participants had good knowledge, while 168 (37.6%) and 93 (20.8%) had moderate and poor knowledge, respectively. Higher knowledge scores were more common among participants with certain demographics, including women, non-local Arabs, healthcare sector employees, and individuals with non-related parents (p < 0.05). Regarding attitudes, 268 (60.0%) of participants had negative attitudes toward consanguinity. Negative attitudes were more frequent among participants with specific demographic characteristics, including female gender, younger age, non-local Arab ethnicity, students, unmarried individuals, and having non-related parents (p < 0.05). Additionally, 402 (90.0%) of participants believed that premarital testing is necessary. Conclusions This study shows that greater knowledge of the health consequences of consanguinity is associated with more negative attitudes toward the practice, indicating that awareness can influence societal perspectives. Demographic factors such as age, gender, and culture have a strong impact on attitudes, emphasizing the need for targeted interventions to shift perceptions of consanguineous marriages across different cultural groups.
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.