1968
DOI: 10.1007/bf00669408
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Kindliche Hirnsch�den nach operativen Geburten

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

1968
1968
1997
1997

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Studies which report the occurrence of obstetric complications in people who develop intellectual disability find consistently higher rates in the latter compared to controls (Lilienfeld et al 19555 Pasamanick & Lilienfeld 1955;Chefetz 1965J Turner 19755 Nelson & Broman 1977Rao 1990;Wellesley et al 1991;Buka et al 1993). The factors most frequently implicated in the aetiology of intellectual disability are: anoxia and asphyxia in labour (Westgren et al 1986;Buka et al 1993)5 malpresentations, most commonly breech (Dale & Stanley 1980;Nilsen & Bergsjo 1985); vaginally delivered breech presentations (Bolte et al 1986;Luterkort et al 1987); low birth weight; dysmaturity (Ranntakillo et al 1985;Dunn 1986); bleeding in pregnancy (Hagberg et al 1976;Taylor et al 1985;Nelson & EUenberg 1986); maternal hypertension in pregnancy (Nelson & EUenberg 1986;Szymonowicz & Yu 1987); maternal diabetes (Dekaban & Magee 1958;Robinson 1970); maternal infection with syphilis, rubella, cytomegalovinis, influenza, listeriosis, congenital toxoplasmosis. Varicella zoster and/or Herpes simplex virus (Penrose 1938;Swan & Tostevin 1941;Coffey & Jessop 1959;Manson et al 1963;Fleck 1973;Hanshaw & Dudgeon 1978;Dudgeon 1984); and drugs or substance use/abuse, most commonly alcohol (Claren & Smith 1978;Olegard et al 1979;Hagberg et al 1981;Blomquist etal.…”
Section: The Aetiology Of Intellectual Disabilitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Studies which report the occurrence of obstetric complications in people who develop intellectual disability find consistently higher rates in the latter compared to controls (Lilienfeld et al 19555 Pasamanick & Lilienfeld 1955;Chefetz 1965J Turner 19755 Nelson & Broman 1977Rao 1990;Wellesley et al 1991;Buka et al 1993). The factors most frequently implicated in the aetiology of intellectual disability are: anoxia and asphyxia in labour (Westgren et al 1986;Buka et al 1993)5 malpresentations, most commonly breech (Dale & Stanley 1980;Nilsen & Bergsjo 1985); vaginally delivered breech presentations (Bolte et al 1986;Luterkort et al 1987); low birth weight; dysmaturity (Ranntakillo et al 1985;Dunn 1986); bleeding in pregnancy (Hagberg et al 1976;Taylor et al 1985;Nelson & EUenberg 1986); maternal hypertension in pregnancy (Nelson & EUenberg 1986;Szymonowicz & Yu 1987); maternal diabetes (Dekaban & Magee 1958;Robinson 1970); maternal infection with syphilis, rubella, cytomegalovinis, influenza, listeriosis, congenital toxoplasmosis. Varicella zoster and/or Herpes simplex virus (Penrose 1938;Swan & Tostevin 1941;Coffey & Jessop 1959;Manson et al 1963;Fleck 1973;Hanshaw & Dudgeon 1978;Dudgeon 1984); and drugs or substance use/abuse, most commonly alcohol (Claren & Smith 1978;Olegard et al 1979;Hagberg et al 1981;Blomquist etal.…”
Section: The Aetiology Of Intellectual Disabilitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Brain damage is the most common cause of death with breech born infants. Frequently, intracranial 1 haemorrhage was found in post-mortem examinations, namely 50% [9], 48% [44], 35% [46]-These figures include both damage due to asphyxia and mechanical trauma. It seems, that in term infants there is a prevalence of mechanical factors.…”
Section: Perus Associated With Breech Deliverymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, only a few of them hold up to critical evaluation. It is not surprising therefore that the results of these studies vary considerably, for instance, some researchers [8,25,27,30,34,43,48] predict favorable developments for breech born infants, others [9,21,24,42,47,50,55] suggest unfavorable ones. Unfortunately, all of these follow-up studies have serious shortcomings.…”
Section: Critical Remarks On the Validity Of Follow-up Studies In Brementioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation