The aetiology distribution of birth defects based on the China Birth Cohort Study

Xiaohang Liu1, Ruixia Liu2, Chen Wang3

  • 1Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Evidence-based Medicine, Beijing Children's Hospital, Capital Medical University, National Center for Children Health, Beijing, China.

BMJ Paediatrics Open
|November 22, 2025
PubMed

Insights

Nearly 80% of birth defects lack identifiable causes, highlighting the need to establish causal links between risk factors and congenital abnormalities. Further research is crucial for prevention strategies.

Area of Science:

  • Medical Genetics
  • Developmental Biology
  • Public Health

Background:

  • Birth defects represent a significant global health burden, necessitating identification of their causes.
  • Current understanding of birth defect etiology is limited, with few established causal relationships.
  • The China Birth Cohort Study (CBCS) provides a valuable dataset for investigating birth defect causes.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To analyze birth defect cases from the CBCS to determine the etiological profile.
  • To identify the proportion of birth defects with known causes and their categories.
  • To understand the distribution of causes across different pregnancy outcomes.

Main Methods:

  • Analysis of 2123 birth defect cases from the CBCS (November 2017 - August 2021).
  • Categorization of causes into chromosomal anomalies, genetic anomalies, environmental exposures, and twinning.
  • Genetic screening and review of exposure data for etiological determination.

Main Results:

  • Only 22.4% of reviewed birth defect cases had identifiable causes.
  • Congenital heart disease, polydactyly, trisomy 21, and cleft lip/palate were most common.
  • Identifiable causes included chromosomal anomalies (415), monogenic disorders (31), environmental exposures (23), and twinning (6).

Conclusions:

  • A significant majority (nearly 80%) of birth defects in the CBCS cohort lack identifiable causes.
  • Translating statistical associations into causal relationships for risk factors is essential.
  • Further research is needed to elucidate the etiology of the majority of birth defects.
Abstract

Related Concept Videos

Probability Laws01:49

Probability Laws

Overview
43.9K
Pedigree Analysis01:35

Pedigree Analysis

Overview
88.7K
Nondisjunction01:21

Nondisjunction

Nondisjunction is the failure of homologous chromosomes or sister chromatids to separate correctly and move to the opposite poles of the cells. This produces daughter cells with abnormal chromosome numbers.  Nondisjunction is common during anaphase I or anaphase II of meiosis.  Mutations in synaptonemal complex proteins that attach homologous chromosomes increase the chances of nondisjunction in anaphase I of meiosis I. In contrast, mutations in topoisomerases and condensins that hold...
4.8K
Teratogenicity01:07

Teratogenicity

The ability of a drug to produce structural deformations and functional abnormalities in the developing embryo or the fetus is called teratogenicity, and the drug producing this effect is known as a teratogen. Teratogenic effects include stillbirth, miscarriage, intrauterine growth restriction, and neurocognitive delay. A teratogen may affect the embryo at different stages of development, which is important in determining the type and extent of the damage. During blastocyst formation, the early...
3.9K
Sex-linked Disorders01:43

Sex-linked Disorders

Like autosomes, sex chromosomes contain a variety of genes necessary for normal body function. When a mutation in one of these genes results in biological deficits, the disorder is considered sex-linked.
108.2K
Bias in Epidemiological Studies01:29

Bias in Epidemiological Studies

Biases can arise at various stages of research, from study design and data collection to analysis and interpretation. Recognizing and addressing these biases is essential to ensure the validity and reliability of epidemiological findings.Broadly speaking, biases in epidemiology fall into three main categories: selection bias, information bias, and confounding. A more detailed description of possible biases is:  
1.2K