Skip to main content

Boy/Girl Imbalance in Children Born to Asian-Born US Mothers

April 17, 2012 (Phoenix, Arizona) — An imbalance in the ratio of girls to boys born to mothers in the United States who were born in China and India suggests patterns similar to those associated with some Asian cultures, according to a study presented here at the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine 2012 Annual Convention.
When Asian mothers living in Santa Clara County in California were evaluated according to their country of birth, notable differences in the ratios of male and female children were found between mothers born in China and India, which are associated with cultural biases toward boys, and those born in Pakistan, which has no such association, explained lead author G. Sharat Lin, PhD, from Advanced Imaging Associates in Fremont, California.
The California Department of Public Health database provided annual birth statistics from 1995 to 2009. The statistics reflect data according to county, race, and the sex of the child. Statistics reflecting the country of birth of the mother were obtained from the Santa Clara County Public Health Department.
Among mothers born in China, the sex ratio, defined as the number of females born for every 1000 males, ranged from a low of 784 in 1996 (n = 528) to a high of 1040 in 2007 (n = 1177) and 2008 (n = 1083). From 1995 to 2009, the cumulative sex ratio was 931.
For mothers born in India, the sex ratio ranged from 803 in 1995 (n = 779) to 1006 in 1998 (n = 1338), with a cumulative ratio for the study period of 937.
In comparison, the sex ratios for mothers born in Pakistan ranged from 747 in 2001 (n = 145) to 1279 in 1998 (n = 98), with a cumulative ratio of 992.
For all Asians mothers in Santa Clara County, the ratios ranged from 902 to 965 over the study years (mean, 936).
Comparatively, sex ratios in the general American population ranged from 937 to 962, with a cumulative sex ratio for the study period of 951.
The findings underscore a trend toward lower sex ratios in the cultural groups most associated with sex-selective abortions in their countries of origin, Dr. Lin told Medscape Medical News.
"The significance of this study is that low [sex] ratios in Asians in California is confirmed by [sex] ratios in specific ethnic groups and not others," he said.
"The low [sex] ratios are not entirely statistical fluctuations, but are correlated with cultural preferences," he explained.
In a previous study, Dr. Lin and colleagues evaluated the role of the proliferation of "keepsake" 4D ultrasound businesses promoting sex identification in sex ratio imbalances; however, the research fell short of proving any kind of causative association.
Factors that clearly could influence such preferences include deep-seated traditions from previous generations, Dr. Lin added.
"Broadly speaking, sex preference is cultural. For example, Hindu marriages in the United States continue to practice dowry, even if of a lesser magnitude and less mandatory, from the bride's family to the groom's family. This is an example of a culturally based financial incentive to have boys," he explained.
"In most Indian and Chinese families, the patrilineal society favors boys to carry on the family line."
China's well-documented sex imbalance, driven largely by the country's 1-child policy, is reportedly improving. The official newspaper, the People's Daily, reported in March that 117.78 boys were born to every 100 girls in China in 2010, down from 119.45 in 2010 and 117.94 in 2009.
In India, however, the imbalance is said to be worsening because of a long-held perception of males as financial providers. Census data showed a sex ratio of 914 in 2011, a steep decline from the ratio of 933 in 2001, according to a Reuters report.
The extent to which cultural biases influence birth rates in the United States is not clear, but with imbalances still so prevalent in other countries and with the number of immigrants to the United States, it is an issue, said David N. Jackson, MD, professor of obstetrics and gynecology in the division of maternal–fetal medicine at the University of Nevada School of Medicine in Las Vegas, who moderated the session.
"This is a provocative observational report that raises the question of [sex] selection as an ongoing issue in pregnancies in the United States," said Dr. Jackson.
He noted that the issue of keepsake ultrasound is "interesting and provocative," but that much more research is needed to confirm any kind of association with sex ratios.
"It's very speculative but probably deserves further scientific confirmation," he said.
The US Food and Drug Administration has issued public statements about the keepsake ultrasound businesses, discouraging the use of ultrasound unless it is medically necessary.
Although the warnings do not address the issue of sex identification, the agency cautions that the long-term effects of repeated ultrasound exposure on the fetus are not fully known, and that ultrasound imaging done by technicians with inadequate training could potentially result in longer exposure times and higher energy levels than are usually used in medical situations.
The businesses are not prohibited, but Dr. Lin said they seem to be shifting to lower-profile locations.
"They appear to be increasing in number in outlying suburban areas where they feel they will be subject to less regulatory scrutiny," he said. "There are fewer such businesses in large cities and in their urban cores."
Dr. Lin and Dr. Jackson have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine (AIUM) 2012 Annual Convention: Abstract 1241752. Presented March 31, 2012.

Authors and Disclosures

Journalist

Nancy A Melville

Nancy Melville is a freelance writer for Medscape.

Disclosure: Nancy Melville has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Missing Data Lead FDA Panel to Vote Against Rivaroxaban for ACS May 23, 2012 (Updated May 24, 2012) (Silver Spring, Maryland) — The missing data issues plaguing the ATLAS ACS 2 TIMI 51 trial of the factor Xa inhibitor rivaroxaban (Xarelto, Bayer Healthcare/Janssen Pharmaceuticals) have prevented the drug from earning the endorsement of the FDA Cardiovascular and Renal Drugs Advisory Committee. At its May 23 meeting, the panel voted six to four (with one abstention) against recommending that the FDA approve rivaroxaban for reducing the risk of thrombotic cardiovascular events in patients with acute coronary syndrome or unstable angina in combination with aspirin, aspirin plus clopidogrel, or ticlopidine. Janssen's application is based on the results of the ATLAS ACS 2 phase 3 and the ATLAS ACS TIMI 46 phase 2 trial. The placebo-controlled ATLAS ACS 2 showed rivaroxaban reduced the risk of both all-cause and cardiovascular mortality while increasing the risk of bleeding and intracranial hemorrhage, but the studies were hindered by early patient withdrawals and missing data. We Don't Know What We're Missing Based on the ATLAS ACS 2 results, FDA reviewer Dr Karen Hicks recommended approval of rivaroxaban for the requested indications except all-cause mortality. However, another FDA reviewer, Dr Thomas Marciniak, was adamant that the trial results are not interpretable because about 12% of the patients had incomplete follow-up, far higher than the 1% to 1.5% differences in the end-point rates between rivaroxaban and placebo. A total of 1294 subjects discontinued the trial prematurely, and the company was only able to contact 183, of which 177 were confirmed to be alive. Because of the patient dropouts, the company adopted a "modified intention-to-treat analysis," whereby patients were observed for 30 days after randomization or the global end date for the trial, instead of observing all the patients until the end of the trial as the FDA originally suggested. Marciniak criticized the sponsor's efforts to follow the patients and said that three patient deaths not counted in the modified intention-to-treat analysis may just be the "tip of the iceberg." Because the percentage of patients whose ultimate vital status remains unknown is much greater than the reported differences in mortality rates, the claimed mortality benefits are not reliable. The majority of the panel sided with Marciniak. For example, Dr Sanjay Kaul (University of California, Los Angeles) voted "no" because "there was enough uncertainty in the quality and robustness of the data that dissuaded me from voting yes. . . . The 'missingness' of the data doesn't invalidate it, but it certainly makes it hard to infer [the conclusion]." Dr Steven Nissen (Cleveland Clinic, OH) said that the decision to use the modified intention-to-treat analysis had a "profound impact" on the interpretability of the data. "It's saying we don't care what happens after 30 days, [and] that colored the trial in ways we couldn't recover from." Given the risk of major bleeding, "I want to see better evidence that this strategy of adding an Xa inhibitor or a direct thrombin inhibitor or something else to a good antiplatelet agent is robustly better for the patient," Nissen said. He recommends that the companies run a new trial of the 2.5 twice-daily dose of rivaroxaban using a strict intention-to-treat approach, but, he said, "I don't expect the death benefit to be too robust." Several panelists said they were concerned that the patients who dropped out of the trial were disproportionately likely to have a bleeding event, which led them to quit the trial, or a "protopathic" event, as statistician Dr Scott Emerson (University of Washington, Seattle) put it. "We're worried that an impending event is what is changing their behavior. We see that all the time in clinical trials--that regularly measured end points do not pick up [all of] the events," he said. He said that since the company was only able to contact 183 of the over 1200 patients who dropped out, it is possible that the dropouts skew the outcomes comparison of the trial. "Differential event rates after dropout are the number-one thing we're afraid of, so you have to explore it" in a statistical sensitivity analysis of the potential impact of these unknown outcomes. "It would not surprise me if, at the end of the day, these data did not hold up under a proper sensitivity analysis," he said. "What I want to know is, among the people who had events, how differential was the follow-up, but I can tell you by just looking at it, there was a very slightly different amount of follow-up of the people in the treatment arm. But I don't know whether everyone in the treatment arm was cured and they were trekking in the Himalayas and everyone in the placebo arm went home to die. I don't know that that's not the case." Dr Maury Krantz (University of Colorado, Denver) voted in favor of approval but said he does not know how rivaroxaban would perform in general clinical practice, especially when used with aspirin and clopidogrel. "I felt very much torn by this. This isn't a simple paradigm shift. It means going to triple therapy, which is really a three-headed monster in many ways. I think that what you're going to see in practice, if this is not done carefully with the proper labeling and secondary studies, is really dramatic magnification of bleeding and perhaps minimization of the efficacy benefit."

May 23, 2012   (Updated May 24, 2012)  (Silver Spring, Maryland)  —  The missing data issues plaguing the  ATLAS ACS 2 TIMI 51   trial of the factor Xa inhibitor  rivaroxaban  (Xarelto, Bayer Healthcare/Janssen Pharmaceuticals) have prevented the drug from earning the endorsement of the  FDA  Cardiovascular and Renal Drugs Advisory Committee. At its May 23 meeting , the panel voted six to four (with one abstention) against recommending that the FDA approve rivaroxaban for reducing the risk of thrombotic cardiovascular events in patients with acute coronary syndrome or unstable angina in combination with aspirin, aspirin plus  clopidogrel , or  ticlopidine . Janssen's application is based on the results of the ATLAS ACS 2 phase 3 and the  ATLAS ACS TIMI 46   phase 2 trial. The placebo-controlled ATLAS ACS 2 showed rivaroxaban reduced the risk of both all-cause and cardiovascular mortality while increasing the ri...

Antidepressants Linked to Higher Diabetes Risk in Kids

Pediatric patients who use antidepressants may have an elevated risk for type 2 diabetes, the authors of a new study report. In a retrospective cohort study of more than 119,000 youths 5 to 20 years of age, the risk for incident type 2 diabetes was nearly twice as high among current users of certain types of antidepressants as among former users, Mehmet Burcu, PhD, and colleagues report in an article  published online October 16 in  JAMA Pediatrics . The risk intensified with increasing duration of use, greater cumulative doses, and higher daily doses of these antidepressants. The findings point to a growing need for closer monitoring of these products, including greater balancing of risks and benefits, in the pediatric population, the authors caution. They undertook the study because, despite growing evidence of an association between antidepressant use and an increased risk for type 2 diabetes in adults, similar research in pediatric patients was scarce. "To our know...

Contact Precautions May Have Unintended Consequences

Contact precautions, including gloves, gowns, and isolated rooms, have helped stem the transmission of hospital pathogens but have also had some negative consequences, according to findings from a new study. Healthcare worker (HCWs) visited patients on contact precautions less frequently than other patients and spent less time with those patients when they did visit, report Daniel J. Morgan, MD, from the University of Maryland School of Medicine and the Veterans Affairs (VA) Maryland Health Care System, Baltimore, and colleagues. Moreover, patients on contact precautions also received fewer outside visitors. "Less contact with HCWs suggests that other unintended consequences of contact precautions still exist," Dr. Morgan and coauthors write. "The resulting decrease in HCW contact may lead to increased adverse events and a lower quality of patient care due to less consistent patient monitoring and poorer adherence to standard adverse event prevention methods (such...