H L Malherbe, B Modell, H Blencowe, K L Strong, C Aldous
{"title":"A review of key terminology and definitions used for birth defects globally.","authors":"H L Malherbe, B Modell, H Blencowe, K L Strong, C Aldous","doi":"10.1007/s12687-023-00642-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Birth defects, also known as congenital disorders, are a significant health issue impacting at least five million births annually worldwide. For policymakers to mount a relevant healthcare response to care for those affected, the burden of disease of these conditions must be quantified. Estimates of the contribution of birth defects to under-5 child mortality and morbidity are generated by several groups globally. These estimates often differ, causing confusion for policymakers. While some differences may be attributed to the data sources and methods used, much is due to a lack of clarity in the terminology used for the group of disorders classed as \"congenital\". This study aimed to gain insight into the diversity of terms and definitions for birth defects, including those used routinely by relevant international/national organisations and in the peer-reviewed literature. This two-part study included (1) scoping review of peer-reviewed literature to identify terms and definitions in use for birth defects and (2) review of key websites and grey literature to identify terms and definitions used. The results of this study indicate a wide variety of terms being used, often interchangeably and undefined, in peer-reviewed publications, on institutional websites and related literature. This suggests a lack of clarity related to terminology and sets the scene for further discussion, recommending that the community of practice working on birth defects comes to a consensus on standard terminology and definitions for global uptake and implementation. Such standardisation will facilitate a common understanding of the burden of these disorders globally, regionally and within countries so that action can be taken to support affected children and their families.</p>","PeriodicalId":46965,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Community Genetics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10272040/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Community Genetics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12687-023-00642-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/4/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Birth defects, also known as congenital disorders, are a significant health issue impacting at least five million births annually worldwide. For policymakers to mount a relevant healthcare response to care for those affected, the burden of disease of these conditions must be quantified. Estimates of the contribution of birth defects to under-5 child mortality and morbidity are generated by several groups globally. These estimates often differ, causing confusion for policymakers. While some differences may be attributed to the data sources and methods used, much is due to a lack of clarity in the terminology used for the group of disorders classed as "congenital". This study aimed to gain insight into the diversity of terms and definitions for birth defects, including those used routinely by relevant international/national organisations and in the peer-reviewed literature. This two-part study included (1) scoping review of peer-reviewed literature to identify terms and definitions in use for birth defects and (2) review of key websites and grey literature to identify terms and definitions used. The results of this study indicate a wide variety of terms being used, often interchangeably and undefined, in peer-reviewed publications, on institutional websites and related literature. This suggests a lack of clarity related to terminology and sets the scene for further discussion, recommending that the community of practice working on birth defects comes to a consensus on standard terminology and definitions for global uptake and implementation. Such standardisation will facilitate a common understanding of the burden of these disorders globally, regionally and within countries so that action can be taken to support affected children and their families.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Community Genetics is an international forum for research in the ever-expanding field of community genetics, the art and science of applying medical genetics to human communities for the benefit of their individuals.
Community genetics comprises all activities which identify persons at increased genetic risk and has an interest in assessing this risk, in order to enable those at risk to make informed decisions. Community genetics services thus encompass such activities as genetic screening, registration of genetic conditions in the population, routine preconceptional and prenatal genetic consultations, public education on genetic issues, and public debate on related ethical issues.
The Journal of Community Genetics has a multidisciplinary scope. It covers medical genetics, epidemiology, genetics in primary care, public health aspects of genetics, and ethical, legal, social and economic issues. Its intention is to serve as a forum for community genetics worldwide, with a focus on low- and middle-income countries.
The journal features original research papers, reviews, short communications, program reports, news, and correspondence. Program reports describe illustrative projects in the field of community genetics, e.g., design and progress of an educational program or the protocol and achievement of a gene bank. Case reports describing individual patients are not accepted.