23
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Population-Based Microcephaly Surveillance in the United States, 2009 to 2013: An Analysis of Potential Sources of Variation

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Congenital microcephaly has been linked to maternal Zika virus infection. However, ascertaining infants diagnosed with microcephaly can be challenging.

          Methods

          Thirty birth defects surveillance programs provided data on infants diagnosed with microcephaly born 2009 to 2013. The pooled prevalence of microcephaly per 10,000 live births was estimated overall and by maternal/infant characteristics. Variation in prevalence was examined across case finding methods. Nine programs provided data on head circumference and conditions potentially contributing to microcephaly.

          Results

          The pooled prevalence of microcephaly was 8.7 per 10,000 live births. Median prevalence (per 10,000 live births) was similar among programs using active (6.7) and passive (6.6) methods; the interdecile range of prevalence estimates was wider among programs using passive methods for all race/ethnicity categories except Hispanic. Prevalence (per 10,000 live births) was lowest among non-Hispanic Whites (6.5) and highest among non-Hispanic Blacks and Hispanics (11.2 and 11.9, respectively); estimates followed a U-shaped distribution by maternal age with the highest prevalence among mothers <20 years (11.5) and ≥40 years (13.2). For gestational age and birth weight, the highest prevalence was among infants <32 weeks gestation and infants <1500 gm. Case definitions varied; 41.8% of cases had an HC ≥ the 10 th percentile for sex and gestational age.

          Conclusion

          Differences in methods, population distribution of maternal/infant characteristics, and case definitions for microcephaly can contribute to the wide range of observed prevalence estimates across individual birth defects surveillance programs. Addressing these factors in the setting of Zika virus infection can improve the quality of prevalence estimates.

          Related collections

          Most cited references12

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          THE USE OF CONFIDENCE OR FIDUCIAL LIMITS ILLUSTRATED IN THE CASE OF THE BINOMIAL

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Diagnostic approach to microcephaly in childhood: a two-center study and review of the literature.

            The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic approach to microcephaly in childhood and to identify the prevalence of the various underlying causes/disease entities.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Population-based birth defects data in the United States, 2008 to 2012: Presentation of state-specific data and descriptive brief on variability of prevalence.

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                101155107
                30290
                Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol
                Birth Defects Res. Part A Clin. Mol. Teratol.
                Birth defects research. Part A, Clinical and molecular teratology
                1542-0752
                1542-0760
                17 April 2017
                November 2016
                01 November 2017
                : 106
                : 11
                : 972-982
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Division of Congenital and Developmental Disorders, National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia
                [2 ]Carter Consulting Inc., Atlanta, Georgia
                [3 ]Department of Epidemiology, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts
                [4 ]State Center for Health Statistics, N.C. Division of Public Health, Raleigh, North Carolina
                [5 ]Department of Community and Family Health, College of Public Health, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida
                [6 ]Section of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Pediatrics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
                [7 ]Leidos Holdings, Inc., Reston, Virginia
                [8 ]Birth Defects Epidemiology and Surveillance Branch, Texas Department of State Health Services, Austin, Texas
                [9 ]Division of Community and Family Health, Minnesota Department of Health, St. Paul, Minnesota
                [10 ]Oregon Birth Anomalies Surveillance System, Oregon Public Health Division, Portland, Oregon
                [11 ]Center for Birth Defects Research and Prevention, Massachusetts Department of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts
                [12 ]Division of Epidemiologic Studies, Illinois Department of Public Health, Springfield, Illinois
                [13 ]New York State Department of Health, Albany, New York
                [14 ]Utah Birth Defect Network, Division of Family Health and Preparedness, Utah Department of Health, Salt Lake City, Utah
                [15 ]National Birth Defects Prevention Network, Houston, Texas
                [16 ]Division for Vital Records and Health Statistics, Michigan Department of Health and Human Services, Lansing, Michigan
                [17 ]College of Public Health, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence to: Janet D. Cragan, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, MS E86, 1600 Clifton Road NE, Atlanta, GA 30329. jcragan@ 123456cdc.gov
                Article
                PMC5485911 PMC5485911 5485911 hhspa860543
                10.1002/bdra.23587
                5485911
                27891783
                b3832145-a02a-4688-8a85-13abcf94db1a
                History
                Categories
                Article

                microcephaly,surveillance,prevalence,head circumference
                microcephaly, surveillance, prevalence, head circumference

                Comments

                Comment on this article