Literature DB >> 1615428

The use of dysmorphology in birth defects epidemiology.

J M Friedman1.   

Abstract

Most human teratogens have been identified by the clinical recognition of characteristic patterns of congenital anomalies among children whose mothers were exposed to a particular agent during pregnancy. Although this dysmorphologic method has been valuable, it is criticized because it is not easily amenable to statistical evaluation. Conventional birth defects epidemiological studies are designed to permit rigorous statistical assessment, but such investigations usually classify congenital anomalies without adequate consideration of their known etiological heterogeneity. It is possible to combine the best aspects of these two approaches to identifying human teratogens in a "dysmorphologic case/control study." Instead of including all available cases with a given defect, only individuals having the anomaly in the context of a multiple congenital anomaly pattern without a recognizable cause would be selected for inclusion among the case group. The frequency of exposure to the putative teratogen would be determined among these selected cases and among appropriately chosen controls; conventional statistical analysis would then be performed. Although this design reduces the size of the case group compared to a conventional case/control study, the statistical power is unchanged or increased. In addition, biological plausibility is increased by concentrating upon a group of cases that is more likely to have a teratogenic cause.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1615428     DOI: 10.1002/tera.1420450212

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Teratology        ISSN: 0040-3709


  4 in total

1.  Maternal medication and herbal use and risk for hypospadias: data from the National Birth Defects Prevention Study, 1997-2007.

Authors:  Jennifer N Lind; Sarah C Tinker; Cheryl S Broussard; Jennita Reefhuis; Suzan L Carmichael; Margaret A Honein; Richard S Olney; Samantha E Parker; Martha M Werler
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2013-04-26       Impact factor: 2.890

2.  Challenges in Studying Modifiable Risk Factors for Birth Defects.

Authors:  Sarah C Tinker; Suzanne Gilboa; Jennita Reefhuis; Mary M Jenkins; Marcy Schaeffer; Cynthia A Moore
Journal:  Curr Epidemiol Rep       Date:  2015-03

3.  Patterns of multiple congenital anomalies in the National Birth Defect Prevention Study: Challenges and insights.

Authors:  Meredith M Howley; Eva Williford; A J Agopian; Angela E Lin; Lorenzo D Botto; Christopher M Cunniff; Paul A Romitti; Eirini Nestoridi; Marilyn L Browne
Journal:  Birth Defects Res       Date:  2022-03-11       Impact factor: 2.661

Review 4.  Studying the effects of emerging infections on the fetus: Experience with West Nile and Zika viruses.

Authors:  Sonja A Rasmussen; Dana M Meaney-Delman; Lyle R Petersen; Denise J Jamieson
Journal:  Birth Defects Res       Date:  2017-03-15       Impact factor: 2.344

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.