Methodological issues in setting up a surveillance system for birth defects in India

National Medical Journal of India

Volumn 18, Issue 5, 2005, Pages 259-262

  Suresh, Seshadri ^a   Thangavel, Gurusamy ^a   Sujatha, Jagadeesh ^a   Indrani, Suresh ^a  

^a Fetal Care Research Foundation   (India)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIRTH DEFECT; DISEASE CLASSIFICATION; FETUS DEATH; GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION; HEALTH PROGRAM; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; INDIA; INFANT; INFORMATION PROCESSING; NEWBORN; POPULATION DISTRIBUTION; POPULATION RESEARCH; PREVALENCE; REGISTER; RISK ASSESSMENT; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; VALIDATION PROCESS;

ABNORMALITIES; DATA COLLECTION; EPIDEMIOLOGIC STUDIES; GEOGRAPHY; HUMANS; INDIA; INFANT, NEWBORN; POPULATION SURVEILLANCE; PREVALENCE; PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT; PUBLIC HEALTH INFORMATICS; REGISTRIES;

EID: 30944444199     PISSN: 0970258X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Ghosh S, Bali L. Congenital malformations in the newborn. Indian J Child Health 1963;12:448-52.
2. Parange NA, Thangavel G. Ultrasonography in prenatal diagnosis of congenital malformations - experiences from a single centre in rural Maharashtra. Indian J Med Ultrasound 2002;2:61-6.
3. Kochanek KD, Hudson BC. Advanced report of final mortality statistics, 1992. Monthly Vital Statistics Report. 1995; 43 (6 Suppl.). Hyattsville, Maryland:National Center for Health Statistics; 1995. In: Congenital Malformations Registry - 1995 Annual Report. New York:New York State Department of Health. www.health.state.ny.us/nysdoh/cmr/1995/95report.htm
4. The Florida Birth Defects Registry Annual Report on Birth Defects in Florida: 1996. Florida Birth Defects Consortium:Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University, University of South Florida, University of Florida; 1999:1-171. www.doh.state.fl.us/fbdr.
5. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Birth defects and pediatric genetics. National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities (NCBDDD), CDC. http://www.cdc.gov/nceh/cddh/BD/bdpghome.htm
6. Dastgiri S, Stone DH, Le-Ha C, Gilmour WH. Prevalence and secular trend of congenital anomalies in Glasgow, UK. Arch Dis Child 2002;86:257-63.
7. Anand K, Kant S, Kumar G, Kapoor SK. 'Development'is not essential to reduce infant mortality rate in India: Experience from the Ballabgarh project. J Epidemiol Community Health 2000;54:247-53.
8. World Health Organization. Services for the management and prevention of genetic disorders and birth defects in developing countries (WHO/HGN/GL/WAOPBD/99.1). Geneva: WHO; 2000.
9. Bhat BV, Babu L. Congenital malformations at birth - a prospective study from south India. Indian J Pediatr 1998;65:873-81.
10. Dutta V, Chaturvedi P. Congenital malformations in rural Maharashtra. Indian Pediatr 2000;37:998-1001.
11. Verma IC, Saxena R, Lall M, Bijarnia S, Sharma R. Genetic counseling and prenatal diagnosis in India - experience at Sir Ganga Ram Hospital. Indian J Pediatr 2003;70:293-7.
12. Saifulla S, Chandra RK, Pathak IC, Dayal RS. Congenital malformations. Indian Pediatr 1967;4:251-61.
13. Mittal VK, Grewal RS. Congenital malformations in neonates. Indian J Pediatr 1969;36:356-61.
14. Chaturvedi P, Banerjee KS. Spectrum of congenital malformations in the newborns from rural Maharashtra. Indian J Pediatr 1989;56:501-7.
15. Verma IC. High frequency of neural-tube defects in North India. Lancet 1978;1: 879-80.
16. Kulkarni ML, Mathew MA, Reddy V. The range of neural tube defects in southern India. Arch Dis Child 1989;64:201-4.
17. Sharma AK, Upreti M, Kamboj M, Mehra P, Das K, Misra A, et al. Incidence of neural tube defects of Lucknow over a 10 year period from 1982-1991. Indian J Med Res 1994;99:223-6.
18. Jha P. Reliable mortality data: A powerful tool for public health. Natl Med J India 2001;14:129-31.
19. Lockwood DN. Leprosy elimination - a virtual phenomenon or a reality? BMJ 2002;324:1516-18.
20. Hernandez-Diaz S, Werler MM, Walker AM, Mitchell AA. Folic acid antagonists during pregnancy and the risk of birth defects. N Engl J Med 2000;343:1608-14.
21. Agarwal SS. Neural tube defect. A preventable congenital malformation. Indian Pediatr 1999;36:643-8.
22. Last JM. A dictionary of epidemiology. 4th ed. Oxford:Oxford University Press; 2001.
23. Meaney FJ. Introduction: Birth defects surveillance in the United States. Teratology 2001;64:S1-S2.
24. EUROCAT population - Study population, definitions and methods. European registration for congenital anomalies: 1. EUROCAT population. www.eurocat.ulster. ac.uk.
25. Sreevidya S, Sathiyasekaran BW. High caesarean rates in Madras (India): A population-based cross-sectional study. BJOG 2003;110:106-11.
26. Hobbs CA, Hopkins SE, Simmons CJ. Sources of variability in birth defects prevalence rates. Teratology 2001;64:S8-S13.
27. California birth defects monitoring program. www.cbdmp.org
28. Indian Council of Medical Research. National Cancer Registry Programme 1986-2001: An overview. New Delhi:Indian Council of Medical Research; 2002.
29. EUROCAT population - Study population, definitions and methods. European registration for congenital anomalies: 2. Ascertainment methods. www.eurocat.ulster. ac.uk
30. Orton H, Rickard R, Miller L. Using active medical record review and capture-recapture methods to investigate the prevalence of Down syndrome among live-born, infants in Colorado. Teratology 2001;64:S14-S19.
31. Hansen M, Kurinczuk JJ, Bower C, Webb S. The risk of major birth defects after intracytoplasmic sperm injection and in vitro fertilization. N Engl J Med 2002;346: 725-30.
32. International statistical classification of diseases and related health problems. Vols 1-3. Tenth Revision. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1992-94.
33. Forrester MB, Metz RD. Inclusion of early fetal deaths in a birth defects surveillance system. Teratology 2001;64:S20-S25.
34. Rasmussen SA, Moore CA. Effective coding in birth defects surveillance. Teratology 2001;64:S3-S7.
35. EUROCAT population - Study population, definitions and methods. European registration for congenital anomalies: 3. Definition and coding of congenital anomalies. www.eurocat.ulster.ac.uk
36. EUROCAT population - Study population, definitions and methods. European registration for congenital anomalies: 5. Calculation of prevalence rates. www.eurocat. ulster.ac.uk
37. Druschel C, Sharpe-Stimac M, Cross P. Process of and problems in changing a birth defects registry reporting system. Teratology 2001;64:S30-S36.