Urban versus rural residence and occurrence of septal heart defects in Texas

BACKGROUND: There is conflicting information on the association between urban/rural residence of mothers and atrial septal defect (ASD) or ventricular septal defect (VSD) in their offspring. Few studies have compared multiple measures of urban/rural residence. METHODS: Data were taken from the Texas...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Birth defects research. A Clinical and molecular teratology 2009-09, Vol.85 (9), p.764-772
Main Authors: Langlois, Peter H., Scheuerle, Angela, Horel, Scott A., Carozza, Susan E.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
abnormalities
Adult
detection bias
Female
heart defects
Heart Septal Defects - epidemiology
Humans
Infant, Newborn
Male
Maternal Exposure
Parity
Pregnancy
Registries
Residence Characteristics
rural
Rural Population - statistics & numerical data
Texas - epidemiology
urban
Urban Population - statistics & numerical data
Young Adult
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:BACKGROUND: There is conflicting information on the association between urban/rural residence of mothers and atrial septal defect (ASD) or ventricular septal defect (VSD) in their offspring. Few studies have compared multiple measures of urban/rural residence. METHODS: Data were taken from the Texas Birth Defects Registry, 1999–2003. Poisson regression was used to compare crude and adjusted birth prevalence. RESULTS: Three broad urban/rural measures, namely, the rural urban continuum code (RUCC), urban influence code (UIC), and rural urban commuting area (RUCA), were correlated with each other, but much less correlated with percentage of land in crops. ASD showed few consistent patterns with RUCC, UIC, and RUCA but was more prevalent in counties with higher cropland percentage. For example, counties with ≥50% cropland had a prevalence ratio (PR) for isolated ASD of 3.49 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.85–4.24) compared to counties with
ISSN:1542-0752
1542-0760
DOI:10.1002/bdra.20586