Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (34)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Krivchenia, E.
Right arrow Articles by Guckenberger, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Krivchenia, E.
Right arrow Articles by Guckenberger, S.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

American Journal of Epidemiology Vol. 137, No. 8: 815-828
Copyright © 1993 by The Johns Hopkins University School of Hygiene and Public Health


research-article

Comparative Epidemiology of Down Syndrome in Two United States Populations, 1970–1989

Eric Krivchenia1 2, Carl A. Huether1,, Larry D. Edmonds3, Daniel S. May4 5 and Susan Guckenberger1 6

1Department of Biological Sciences, University of Cincinnati Cincinnati, OH
3Birth Defects Branch, Center for Environmental Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Atlanta, GA
4Department of Biology, Mercer University Atlanta, GA

Reprint requests to Dr. Carl A. Huether, Department of Biological Sciences, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH 45221-0006.

This study compared the epidemiology of Down syndrome over a 20-year period, 1970–1989, in two populations in which livebirths with Down syndrome were believed to be highly ascertained. One population was a 10-county region in southwest Ohio; the second was a five-county region in metropolitan Atlanta, Georgia. The major objectives were to 1) compare observed incidences of Down syndrome over the entire study period; 2) calculate expected incidences of Down syndrome for each population and compare these with observed incidences; 3) determine incidence trends throughout the period; and 4) examine the impact of prenatal diagnosis on the observed incidence of Down syndrome in each population. Excluding aborted fetuses with Down syndrome diagnosed prenatally, the observed incidence of Down syndrome, 0.98, was significantly lower than that expected, 1.27, within the Atlanta white data set. Once the observed data were adjusted to include aborted fetuses with Down syndrome (total incidence=1.17), no statistically significant differences remained. No differences were found between observed and expected incidences of Down syndrome for whites in southwest Ohio or for other races in either population. Although uncorrected observed incidences were significantly different between the two populations of whites for the entire 20-year period, the differences again disappeared after the data were corrected to include aborted fetuses. No significant effect of prenatal diagnosis on those of other races was found in either population. Expected Down syndrome incidences rose from the late 1970s throughout the 1980s for both racial groups in Ohio and Atlanta, Georgia; however, because the termination of fetuses with Down syndrome increased over the decade, the observed incidence among whites in southwest Ohio remained at earlier levels and actually fell among whites in Atlanta. These results indicate the increasing importance of prenatal diagnosis and selective abortion in the epidemiology of Down syndrome and of correcting for it when comparing incidences between populations, even within the same time period. These data from 2 decades show that differences in both observed and expected incidences of Down syndrome exist between both populations and races, principally because of differences in demographic age structure and maternal age fertility rates and because of differential use of prenatal diagnosis and selective abortion.

age factors; Down's syndrome; incidence; population surveillance; prenatal diagnosis


2Present address: Department of Reproductive Genetics, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hutzel Hospital, Detroit, MI.

5Present address: Center for Chronic Disease, Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA.

6Present address: School of Medicine, Southern Illinois University, Springfield, IL.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.