M Vrijheid1, H Dolk, D Stone, L Abramsky, E Alberman, J E Scott. 1. Environmental Epidemiology Unit, Department of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London WC1E 7HT, UK. mvrijheid@lshtm.ac.uk
Abstract
AIMS: To investigate socioeconomic inequalities in the risk of congenital anomalies, focusing on risk of specific anomaly subgroups. METHODS: A total of 858 cases of congenital anomaly and 1764 non-malformed control births were collected between 1986 and 1993 from four UK congenital malformation registers, for the purposes of a European multicentre case control study on congenital anomaly risk near hazardous waste landfill sites. As a measure of socioeconomic status, cases and controls were given a value for the area level Carstairs deprivation index, by linking the postcode of residence at birth to census enumeration districts (areas of approximately 150 households). RESULTS: Risk of non-chromosomal anomalies increased with increasing socioeconomic deprivation. The risk in the most deprived quintile of the deprivation index was 40% higher than in the most affluent quintile. Some malformation subgroups also showed increasing risk with increasing deprivation: all cardiac defects, malformations of the cardiac septa, malformations of the digestive system, and multiple malformations. No evidence for socioeconomic variation was found for other non-chromosomal malformation groups, including neural tube defects and oral clefts. A decreasing risk with increasing deprivation found for all chromosomal malformations and Down's syndrome in unadjusted analyses, occurred mainly as a result of differences in the maternal age distribution between social classes. CONCLUSION: Our data, although based on limited numbers of cases and geographical coverage, suggest that more deprived populations have a higher risk of congenital anomalies of non-chromosomal origin and some specific anomalies. Larger studies are needed to confirm these findings and to explore their aetiological implications.
AIMS: To investigate socioeconomic inequalities in the risk of congenital anomalies, focusing on risk of specific anomaly subgroups. METHODS: A total of 858 cases of congenital anomaly and 1764 non-malformed control births were collected between 1986 and 1993 from four UK congenital malformation registers, for the purposes of a European multicentre case control study on congenital anomaly risk near hazardous waste landfill sites. As a measure of socioeconomic status, cases and controls were given a value for the area level Carstairs deprivation index, by linking the postcode of residence at birth to census enumeration districts (areas of approximately 150 households). RESULTS: Risk of non-chromosomal anomalies increased with increasing socioeconomic deprivation. The risk in the most deprived quintile of the deprivation index was 40% higher than in the most affluent quintile. Some malformation subgroups also showed increasing risk with increasing deprivation: all cardiac defects, malformations of the cardiac septa, malformations of the digestive system, and multiple malformations. No evidence for socioeconomic variation was found for other non-chromosomal malformation groups, including neural tube defects and oral clefts. A decreasing risk with increasing deprivation found for all chromosomal malformations and Down's syndrome in unadjusted analyses, occurred mainly as a result of differences in the maternal age distribution between social classes. CONCLUSION: Our data, although based on limited numbers of cases and geographical coverage, suggest that more deprived populations have a higher risk of congenital anomalies of non-chromosomal origin and some specific anomalies. Larger studies are needed to confirm these findings and to explore their aetiological implications.
Authors: H Dolk; M Vrijheid; B Armstrong; L Abramsky; F Bianchi; E Garne; V Nelen; E Robert; J E Scott; D Stone; R Tenconi Journal: Lancet Date: 1998-08-08 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Babak Khoshnood; Catherine De Vigan; Véronique Vodovar; Gérard Bréart; François Goffinet; Béatrice Blondel Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2006-10-31 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: S F Ahmed; R Dobbie; A R Finlayson; J Gilbert; G Youngson; J Chalmers; D Stone Journal: Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed Date: 2004-03 Impact factor: 5.747