Published online Sep 9, 2026. doi: 10.5409/wjcp.118721
Revised: January 30, 2026
Accepted: April 7, 2026
Published online: September 9, 2026
Processing time: 202 Days and 5 Hours
Consanguineous marriage is common in Saudi Arabia and is associated with an increased risk of inherited disorders. However, its relationship with specific neu
To examine the association between parental consanguinity and neurological and developmental disorders among pediatric patients in the Jazan region of Saudi Arabia.
This retrospective cohort study reviewed the medical records of children younger than 14 years who were diag
A total of 105 children were included (mean age 6.26 ± 3.96 years; 63.8% male), of whom 59% had consanguineous parents. Epilepsy was the most prevalent diagnosis (76%), and developmental disorders were present in 69.5% of the children. Focal epilepsy was the most common epilepsy subtype, while global developmental delay/intellec
No clear association was identified between parental consanguinity and the distribution of epilepsy types or developmental disorders in this cohort. Although minor variations were observed between groups, they did not demonstrate statistically significant trends related to parental relatedness, likely reflecting individual variability and the limited sample size. Larger studies across broader populations are needed to further clarify potential associations.
Core Tip: Parental consanguinity remains common in Saudi Arabia and may contribute to the burden of pediatric neu
- Citation: Alhamoud AH, Granana NE, Bajahzer MF, Muthaffar AM, Sabi MA, Aboelsoud AA, Harbi RH, Harbi MH, Hawas AM. Association between consanguinity and neurological and developmental disorders in pediatric patients: A retrospective cohort study in Jazan, Saudi Arabia. World J Clin Pediatr 2026; 15(3): 118721
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2219-2808/full/v15/i3/118721.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5409/wjcp.118721
Consanguinity, derived from the Latin term meaning “shared blood”, refers to marriages between individuals who are biologically related. Such unions are particularly common in certain populations and are associated with an increased risk of autosomal recessive genetic disorders in offspring[1]. Globally, more than 1.2 billion people are estimated to live in communities where consanguineous marriages are practiced[2]. Educational interventions play an important role in enabling individuals to make informed reproductive decisions and in reducing the potential genetic risks associated with these unions.
Consanguineous marriages have been practiced for generations in many societies worldwide[3]. Among these, first-cousin marriages are the most common form, with spouses sharing approximately 12.5% of their genes inherited from common ancestors. This results in an estimated 6.25% homozygosity across genetic loci in their offspring[4]. In Arab countries-including North Africa, the Middle East, and Western Asia-the prevalence of consanguineous marriages ranges from approximately 20% to more than 50% of all unions[5].
In Saudi Arabia, the prevalence of consanguinity varies considerably across regions, with reported rates ranging from 42% to 67%. Studies conducted in the Jazan region indicate particularly high rates[6-8]; for example, one study reported that 66% of married university students were in consanguineous unions compared with 33.3% in non-consanguineous marriages[9]. These findings suggest that sociocultural and familial factors continue to support the practice even among relatively educated populations.
Consanguinity is a well-recognized risk factor for autosomal recessive disorders and neurodevelopmental disabilities[6,10-18]. Higher burdens of congenital anomalies and inherited conditions have been reported in populations with high consanguinity rates[14-25]. Neurological and developmental disorders-including epilepsy, intellectual disability (ID), and autism spectrum disorder (ASD)-have also been associated with consanguinity, largely due to the increased probability of homozygous recessive mutations in offspring of related parents.
This study therefore aimed to examine the association between parental consanguinity and neurological and developmental disorders among pediatric patients in the Jazan region of Saudi Arabia.
This retrospective cohort study was conducted at King Fahad Central Hospital in Jazan, Saudi Arabia, over a two-year period from January 2022 to December 2023.
A total of 105 pediatric patients diagnosed with neurological or developmental disorders were included. Participants were categorized into two cohorts based on parental consanguinity status. The consanguineous group included children whose parents were related as second cousins or closer, while the non-consanguineous group included children whose parents were unrelated.
Children younger than 14 years with a confirmed diagnosis of a non-acquired neurological or developmental disorder were eligible for inclusion. Only records with documented parental consanguinity status were included. Children with acquired neurological disorders (e.g., trauma, central nervous system infections, metabolic or environmental causes), missing or unclear consanguinity data, or incomplete/duplicate records were excluded.
Data were extracted through detailed medical chart reviews and included demographic characteristics (age, sex, and nationality) and clinical diagnoses.
Neurological diagnoses included genetic syndromes, epilepsy, developmental delay, and brain dysplasia. Epilepsy was clinically classified as focal, generalized, or undetermined based on documentation from the treating neurology team and supported by electroencephalography and neuroimaging findings when available.
Developmental disorders were categorized into global developmental delay (GDD), ID, language and communication disorders, motor impairments, and ASD. Diagnoses were recorded as documented by the treating pediatric neurology or developmental specialists.
For consistency, GDD was defined as a significant delay in two or more developmental domains in children younger than five years. ID and ASD were recorded according to clinician diagnoses documented in the medical records, including DSM-5-based assessments when available.
Parental consanguinity status was classified as consanguineous or non-consanguineous based on the documented parental relationship. Because the degree of relatedness was not consistently recorded, the inbreeding coefficient (F) could not be calculated for this cohort.
Data analysis was performed using Microsoft Excel for Mac (Version 16.107.1). Categorical variables were summarized using n (%), while continuous variables were reported as means ± SDs.
χ2 tests or Fisher’s exact tests were used to compare distributions between the consanguineous and non-consanguineous groups. A P value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Ethical approval for this study was obtained from the Jazan Health Committee (Approval No. 23100; Date: 25 October 2023).
A total of 105 children with non-acquired neurological or developmental disorders met the inclusion criteria (Table 1). The mean age of the cohort was 6.26 ± 3.96 years (range: 5 months–14 years). Males accounted for 63.8% (67/105) of the participants.
| Characteristic | Value |
| Total participants (n) | 105 |
| M | 67 (63.8) |
| F | 38 (36.2) |
| Sex ratio (M:F) | 1.76:1 |
| Age | |
| Mean (years) ± SD | 6.26 ± 3.96 |
| Range | (5 months-14 years) |
| Consanguinity | 62 (59) |
| Non-consanguinity | 43 (41) |
Parental consanguinity was documented in 62 cases (59%), whereas 43 children (41%) were born to non-consanguineous parents. Most participants were Saudi nationals (85%), followed by Yemeni (5%), while the remaining 10% represented other nationalities, including the Philippines, Pakistan, Syria, Egypt, and Niger.
Among the neurological disorders identified, genetic syndromes were the most frequently diagnosed, observed in 51.4% (54/105) of the total cohort (Table 2). These diagnoses were more commonly recorded among children born to consanguineous parents.
| Syndrome | Consanguineous | Non-consanguineous | Total |
| n | 62 | 43 | 105 |
| Genetic syndromes | 36 (58.1) | 18 (41.9) | 54 (51.4) |
| Brain dysplasia | 4 (6.5) | 6 (14.0) | 10 (9.5) |
| Epilepsy | 47 (75.8) | 33 (76.7) | 80 (76.2) |
In this retrospective cohort, the term “genetic syndromes” refers to syndromic or suspected genetic etiologies docu
Epilepsy was diagnosed in 76.2% of the study population (80/105), representing the most prevalent neurological condition (Table 2). The proportion of epilepsy cases was similar between the consanguineous group (47/62, 75.8%) and the non-consanguineous group (33/43, 76.7%), with no statistically significant difference (P = 0.91) (Table 3).
| Epilepsy | Consanguineous | Non-consanguineous | Total | χ2 | P value |
| Any epilepsy | 47 (75.8) | 33 (76.7) | 80 (76.2) | 0.01 | 0.91 |
| Epilepsy type among epilepsy cases | |||||
| Focal epilepsy | 23 (48.9) | 20 (60.6) | 43 (53.8) | 1.06 | 0.30 |
| Generalized epilepsy | 22 (46.8) | 12 (36.4) | 34 (42.5) | 0.87 | 0.35 |
| Undetermined | 2 (4.3) | 0 (0.0) | 2 (2.5) | 1 | 0.34 |
| Type not documented | 0 (0.0) | 1 (3.0) | 1 (1.3) | 1 | 0.41 |
Regarding epilepsy phenotypes, focal epilepsy accounted for 43/80 (53.8%) of all epilepsy cases and was proportionally less common in the consanguineous group (23/47, 48.9%), corresponding to over a 30% reduction in odds (OR = 0.67) compared with the non-consanguineous epilepsy group (20/33, 60.6%); however, this difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.30) (Table 3).
Conversely, children from consanguineous families showed higher odds of generalized epilepsy (OR = 1.57), with 22/47 cases (46.8%) compared with 12/33 cases (36.4%) in the non-consanguineous group; however, this difference also did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.35) (Table 3).
Cases classified as undetermined epilepsy or with undocumented epilepsy type were either absent or very few in both groups, with no clear trends or statistically significant differences between the consanguineous and non-consanguineous groups (P = 0.34 and P = 0.41, respectively) (Table 3).
Developmental disorders were identified in 73/105 children (69.5%) (Table 4). A higher proportion was observed among children from consanguineous families (45/62, 72.6%) compared with those from non-consanguineous families (28/43, 65.1%); however, this difference did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.41).
| Developmental disorder | Consanguineous | Non-consanguineous | Total | χ2 | P value |
| Any developmental disorder | 45 (72.6) | 28 (65.1) | 73 (69.5) | 0.67 | 0.41 |
| GDD/ID | 32 (51.6) | 19 (44.2) | 51 (48.6) | 0.56 | 0.45 |
| Language delay | 11 (17.7) | 6 (14.0) | 17 (16.2) | 0.27 | 0.60 |
| Motor impairment | 17 (27.4) | 6 (14.0) | 23 (21.9) | 2.69 | 0.10 |
| ASD | 2 (3.2) | 2 (4.6) | 4 (3.8) | 1 | 0.36 |
A trend toward increased motor impairment disorders was observed in the consanguineous group (17/62, 27.4%) compared with the non-consanguineous group (6/43, 14.0%), corresponding to more than twice the odds (OR = 2.33; χ2 = 2.69). Nevertheless, this difference did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.10) (Table 4).
Similarly, minor proportional differences were observed in the distribution of other developmental disorders between the two groups, but none reached statistical significance. These included language delay (11/62, 17.7% vs 6/43, 14.0%; P = 0.60), GDD/ID (32/62, 51.6% vs 19/43, 44.2%; P = 0.45), and ASD (2/62, 3.2% vs 2/43, 4.6%; P = 0.36) (Table 4).
Developmental disorders were identified in 61/80 children with epilepsy (76.3%). Within this subgroup, a slightly lower proportion of children from consanguineous families (36/48, 75.0%) had at least one developmental disorder compared with those from non-consanguineous families (25/32, 78.1%); however, this difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.75).
A trend toward higher odds of motor impairment disorders was observed among children from consanguineous families. Specifically, motor impairment was identified in 11/48 (22.9%) children in the consanguineous group compared with 3/32 (9.4%) in the non-consanguineous group, corresponding to approximately threefold higher odds (OR = 2.79; χ2 = 2.44). However, this difference did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.12).
Similarly, slight proportional differences were observed in the distribution of other developmental disorders between the two groups, but none reached statistical significance. These included language delay (7/48, 14.6% vs 4/32, 12.5%; P = 0.79), GDD/ID (23/48, 47.9% vs 14/32, 43.8%; P = 0.71), and ASD (2/48, 4.2% vs 0/32, 0.0%; P = 0.36) (Table 5).
| Developmental disorder | Epilepsy + consanguineous | Epilepsy + non-consanguineous | Total | χ2 | P value |
| n | 48 | 32 | 80 | ||
| Any developmental disorder | 36 (75.0) | 25 (78.1) | 61 (76.3) | 0.10 | 0.75 |
| GDD/ID | 23 (47.9) | 14 (43.8) | 37 (46.3) | 0.13 | 0.71 |
| Language delay | 7 (14.6) | 4 (12.5) | 11 (13.8) | 0.07 | 0.79 |
| Motor impairment | 11 (22.9) | 3 (9.4) | 14 (17.5) | 2.44 | 0.12 |
| ASD | 2 (4.2) | 0 (0.0) | 2 (2.5) | 1 | 0.36 |
Neurological and developmental disorders impose substantial physical, cognitive, emotional, and economic burdens on children, families, and healthcare systems worldwide[13,14,20,21]. Reliable epidemiological data are therefore essential for effective preventive planning; however, available evidence from Saudi Arabia remains largely hospital-based and fragmented[13,20].
This study contributes to regional knowledge by characterizing pediatric neurological and developmental disorders in a high-consanguinity setting. Consistent with previous genomic studies from Saudi Arabia[13,15-17], 59% of affected children in our cohort were born to consanguineous parents.
Whole-exome sequencing studies conducted in Saudi populations have demonstrated diagnostic yields of approximately 53% in consanguineous cohorts compared with 25%-35% in mixed populations. In highly selected neurogenetic families[11-15]; the diagnostic yield may reach up to 86%[12,16]. Because our cohort consisted predominantly of Saudi patients, these findings provide relevant contextual benchmarks[13,17].
Consanguinity is a well-established risk factor for autosomal recessive disorders and associated neurodevelopmental disabilities[14-18]. Population studies from Kuwait, Qatar, and China report markedly higher risks of recessive disorders, structural anomalies, developmental delay, and ASD among offspring of consanguineous unions[14-16,18-20]. Risk increases with closer parental relatedness and repeated intrafamilial marriages[21-23]. National surveys cite Saudi consanguinity rates of 42%-67%[6-8], while registry data indicate one of the world’s highest burdens of recessive disease[17-23]. Local figures are even higher (up to 80% in Samtah[18,19] and 66% among Jazan university students[9] yet awareness of carrier-screening programmes remains limited[17,23].
In our cohort, epilepsy affected 80/105 children (76%), which is higher than rates reported in some regional cohorts (e.g., 17.7%)[19,24]. This difference may reflect tertiary-care case mix, referral bias, and phenotype heterogeneity. Despite biological plausibility, epilepsy frequency did not differ significantly between consanguineous and non-consanguineous groups, in contrast to reports of higher odds elsewhere[24-31]. Sample size, referral bias, and heterogeneous epilepsy phenotypes may explain this discrepancy[31]. Importantly, phenotype distribution differed between groups; focal epi
By contrast, developmental phenotypes-particularly language delay and motor impairment-were more common in children from consanguineous families. Similar patterns have been documented in Jordan, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia, where autosomal-recessive ID (ARID) syndromes predominate[32-36]. Up to 3000 genes may underlie ARID[34,36], and many identifiable causes in consanguineous families are recessive[34,36]. Epilepsy is a frequent co-morbidity in these cohorts, whereas ASD associations are inconsistent[32,34]. Our data mirror these inconsistencies: Parental consanguinity did not increase ASD risk, consistent with findings from Qatar[37,38], although chromosomal microarray and exome studies in consanguineous ASD cohorts show higher diagnostic yields[39,40]. Perinatal insults, male sex, and advanced maternal age may further modulate ASD risk in high-consanguinity settings[41,42]; however, these variables were not systematically captured in our records.
The developmental outcomes did not reach statistical significance. Similar findings have been reported in prior Middle Eastern studies, which have sometimes shown no significant group differences[43,44]. Complex inheritance patterns, modifier effects, and incomplete penetrance complicate clear genotype–phenotype mapping. Although language disorders are common in children with GDD/ID (approximately 18/1000) and occur more frequently in boys and socio-economically disadvantaged families[44], the comparable GDD/ID prevalence across our groups suggests that consanguinity may not contribute specifically beyond the overall developmental burden.
Public attitudes toward consanguinity remain mixed, with perceived cultural benefits weighed against potential health risks[6]. A nationwide Saudi survey revealed low disease-specific awareness despite high social-media use, highlighting an opportunity for targeted genetic-counselling campaigns[17,23]. Cultural drivers-including preservation of tribal identity, financial solidarity, and restricted premarital interaction outside kin continue to sustain high consanguinity rates.
This study has important limitations. Because it was retrospective and based on medical records, incomplete documen
This study found no clear association between parental consanguinity and the distribution of epilepsy types or developmental disorders among pediatric patients in this cohort. Although minor differences were observed between groups, these variations were not statistically significant and may reflect individual variability and the relatively small sample size. Nevertheless, the findings highlight the importance of culturally sensitive genetic counseling and early developmental screening in populations with high consanguinity rates. Further large-scale studies across multiple regions are needed to better define the population-level impact of consanguinity on neurological and developmental outcomes.
The authors used ChatGPT (OpenAI) only for language editing; no statistical or scientific analyses were performed by AI.
| 1. | Alshammary AF, Khan IA. Screening of Obese Offspring of First-Cousin Consanguineous Subjects for the Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Gene with a 287-bp Alu Sequence. J Obes Metab Syndr. 2021;30:63-71. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 15] [Cited by in RCA: 23] [Article Influence: 4.6] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 2. | Hussain R, Bittles AH. Sociodemographic correlates of consanguineous marriage in the Muslim population of India. J Biosoc Sci. 2000;32:433-442. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 37] [Cited by in RCA: 21] [Article Influence: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 3. | Fareed M, Afzal M. Evidence of inbreeding depression on height, weight, and body mass index: a population-based child cohort study. Am J Hum Biol. 2014;26:784-795. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 36] [Cited by in RCA: 25] [Article Influence: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (3)] |
| 4. | Fareed M, Afzal M. Genetics of consanguinity and inbreeding in health and disease. Ann Hum Biol. 2017;44:99-107. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 102] [Cited by in RCA: 71] [Article Influence: 7.9] [Reference Citation Analysis (8)] |
| 5. | Bittles AH, Black ML. Evolution in health and medicine Sackler colloquium: Consanguinity, human evolution, and complex diseases. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010;107 Suppl 1:1779-1786. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 444] [Cited by in RCA: 356] [Article Influence: 22.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (5)] |
| 6. | Hamamy H. Consanguineous marriages : Preconception consultation in primary health care settings. J Community Genet. 2012;3:185-192. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 348] [Cited by in RCA: 264] [Article Influence: 18.9] [Reference Citation Analysis (1)] |
| 7. | Mahboub SM, Alsaqabi AA, Allwimi NA, Aleissa DN, Al-Mubarak BA. Prevalence and pattern of consanguineous marriage among educated married individuals in Riyadh. J Biosoc Sci. 2020;52:768-775. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 2] [Cited by in RCA: 16] [Article Influence: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 8. | El-Mouzan MI, Al-Salloum AA, Al-Herbish AS, Qurachi MM, Al-Omar AA. Regional variations in the prevalence of consanguinity in Saudi Arabia. Saudi Med J. 2007;28:1881-1884. [PubMed] |
| 9. | Al-Qadi B, Abu Taleb A, Salih S, Alzaher F, Elaqi A, Hakami R, Halawi S, Osaili E, Ogdi A. Awareness of Jazan University students about consanguineous marriages and inherited disorders. Int J Healthc Sci. 2017;5:30-39. |
| 10. | Roberts DF. Genetic disorders among Arab populations. J Med Genet. 1997;34:704-710. [RCA] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in RCA: 3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 11. | Monies D, Abouelhoda M, Assoum M, Moghrabi N, Rafiullah R, Almontashiri N, Alowain M, Alzaidan H, Alsayed M, Subhani S, Cupler E, Faden M, Alhashem A, Qari A, Chedrawi A, Aldhalaan H, Kurdi W, Khan S, Rahbeeni Z, Alotaibi M, Goljan E, Elbardisy H, ElKalioby M, Shah Z, Alruwaili H, Jaafar A, Albar R, Akilan A, Tayeb H, Tahir A, Fawzy M, Nasr M, Makki S, Alfaifi A, Akleh H, Yamani S, Bubshait D, Mahnashi M, Basha T, Alsagheir A, Abu Khaled M, Alsaleem K, Almugbel M, Badawi M, Bashiri F, Bohlega S, Sulaiman R, Tous E, Ahmed S, Algoufi T, Al-Mousa H, Alaki E, Alhumaidi S, Alghamdi H, Alghamdi M, Sahly A, Nahrir S, Al-Ahmari A, Alkuraya H, Almehaidib A, Abanemai M, Alsohaibaini F, Alsaud B, Arnaout R, Abdel-Salam GMH, Aldhekri H, AlKhater S, Alqadi K, Alsabban E, Alshareef T, Awartani K, Banjar H, Alsahan N, Abosoudah I, Alashwal A, Aldekhail W, Alhajjar S, Al-Mayouf S, Alsemari A, Alshuaibi W, Altala S, Altalhi A, Baz S, Hamad M, Abalkhail T, Alenazi B, Alkaff A, Almohareb F, Al Mutairi F, Alsaleh M, Alsonbul A, Alzelaye S, Bahzad S, Manee AB, Jarrad O, Meriki N, Albeirouti B, Alqasmi A, AlBalwi M, Makhseed N, Hassan S, Salih I, Salih MA, Shaheen M, Sermin S, Shahrukh S, Hashmi S, Shawli A, Tajuddin A, Tamim A, Alnahari A, Ghemlas I, Hussein M, Wali S, Murad H, Meyer BF, Alkuraya FS. Lessons Learned from Large-Scale, First-Tier Clinical Exome Sequencing in a Highly Consanguineous Population. Am J Hum Genet. 2019;104:1182-1201. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 108] [Cited by in RCA: 213] [Article Influence: 30.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 12. | Hiz Kurul S, Oktay Y, Töpf A, Szabó NZ, Güngör S, Yaramis A, Sonmezler E, Matalonga L, Yis U, Schon K, Paramonov I, Kalafatcilar İP, Gao F, Rieger A, Arslan N, Yilmaz E, Ekinci B, Edem PP, Aslan M, Özgör B, Lochmüller A, Nair A, O'Heir E, Lovgren AK; Broad Center for Mendelian Genomics, Maroofian R, Houlden H, Polavarapu K, Roos A, Müller JS, Hathazi D, Chinnery PF, Laurie S, Beltran S, Lochmüller H, Horvath R. High diagnostic rate of trio exome sequencing in consanguineous families with neurogenetic diseases. Brain. 2022;145:1507-1518. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 18] [Cited by in RCA: 28] [Article Influence: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 13. | Alfares A, Alfadhel M, Wani T, Alsahli S, Alluhaydan I, Al Mutairi F, Alothaim A, Albalwi M, Al Subaie L, Alturki S, Al-Twaijri W, Alrifai M, Al-Rumayya A, Alameer S, Faqeeh E, Alasmari A, Alsamman A, Tashkandia S, Alghamdi A, Alhashem A, Tabarki B, AlShahwan S, Hundallah K, Wali S, Al-Hebbi H, Babiker A, Mohamed S, Eyaid W, Zada AAP. A multicenter clinical exome study in unselected cohorts from a consanguineous population of Saudi Arabia demonstrated a high diagnostic yield. Mol Genet Metab. 2017;121:91-95. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 48] [Cited by in RCA: 73] [Article Influence: 8.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 14. | Al-Kandari YY, Crews DE. The effect of consanguinity on congenital disabilities in the Kuwaiti population. J Biosoc Sci. 2011;43:65-73. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 10] [Cited by in RCA: 8] [Article Influence: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 15. | Ben-Omran T, Al Ghanim K, Yavarna T, El Akoum M, Samara M, Chandra P, Al-Dewik N. Effects of consanguinity in a cohort of subjects with certain genetic disorders in Qatar. Mol Genet Genomic Med. 2020;8:e1051. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 12] [Cited by in RCA: 54] [Article Influence: 7.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 16. | Siong KH, Au Yeung SKC, Leung TY. Parental consanguinity in Hong Kong. Hong Kong Med J. 2019;25:192-200. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in RCA: 2] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 17. | Yousef NA, ElHarouni AA, Shaik NA, Banaganapalli B, Al Ghamdi AF, Galal AH, Alahmadi TS, Shuaib T, Aljeaid D, Alshaer DS, Almutadares M, Elango R. Nationwide survey on awareness of consanguinity and genetic diseases in Saudi Arabia: challenges and potential solutions to reduce the national healthcare burden. Hum Genomics. 2024;18:138. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in RCA: 16] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 18. | Khayat AM, Alshareef BG, Alharbi SF, AlZahrani MM, Alshangity BA, Tashkandi NF. Consanguineous Marriage and Its Association With Genetic Disorders in Saudi Arabia: A Review. Cureus. 2024;16:e53888. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 36] [Cited by in RCA: 35] [Article Influence: 17.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 19. | Maheswari K, Wadhwa L. Role of consanguinity in paediatric neurological disorders. Int J Contemp Pediatr. 2016;3:939-942. [DOI] [Full Text] |
| 20. | Al-Rajeh S, Bademosi O, Awada A, Ismail H, Al-Freihi H, Dawodu A, Chebib F, Assuhaimi S. Community survey of neurological disorders in Saudi Arabia: Results of the pilot study in Agrabiah. Ann Saudi Med. 1995;15:32-35. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 13] [Cited by in RCA: 13] [Article Influence: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 21. | Winter S, Autry A, Boyle C, Yeargin-Allsopp M. Trends in the prevalence of cerebral palsy in a population-based study. Pediatrics. 2002;110:1220-1225. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 298] [Cited by in RCA: 219] [Article Influence: 9.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 22. | Bouchard TJ Jr, Segal NL, Lykken DT. Genetic and environmental influences on special mental abilities in a sample of twins reared apart. Acta Genet Med Gemellol (Roma). 1990;39:193-206. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 31] [Cited by in RCA: 26] [Article Influence: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 23. | Pedersen NL, Plomin R, Nesselroade JR, McClearn GE. A quantitative genetic analysis of cognitive abilities during the second half of the life span. Psychol Sci. 1992;3:346-353. [RCA] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 193] [Cited by in RCA: 153] [Article Influence: 17.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 24. | Idris A, Alabdaljabar MS, Almiro A, Alsuraimi A, Dawalibi A, Abduljawad S, AlKhateeb M. Prevalence, incidence, and risk factors of epilepsy in arab countries: A systematic review. Seizure. 2021;92:40-50. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in RCA: 25] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 25. | Younis NS, Mohamed ME, Alolayan AA, Alhussain GY, Al-Mousa HA, Alshamrani JA, AlMutayib MM, AlQahtani MM, Alhaddad ZA, Alfarhan ZS, AlOmran ZA, Almostafa MM. Identification of epilepsy concomitant candidate genes recognized in Saudi epileptic patients. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2022;26:2143-2157. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in RCA: 4] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 26. | Chentouf A, Talhi R, Dahdouh A, Benbihi L, Benilha S, Oubaiche ML, Chaouch M. Consanguinity and epilepsy in Oran, Algeria: A case-control study. Epilepsy Res. 2015;111:10-17. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 12] [Cited by in RCA: 16] [Article Influence: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 27. | Alanazi YW, Sindi ST, Aldaham MA, Jabrah AA. Consanguinity between parents and risk of epilepsy among children in Northern Saudi Arabia. Egypt J Hosp Med. 2018;70:1925-1928. [DOI] [Full Text] |
| 28. | Alqadi KS, Rammal SA, Alam ME, Alshahrani AM, Baeesa SS, Kayyali HR, Babtain FA, Al-Said YA. Consanguinity in patients with mesial temporal lobe epilepsy due to hippocampal sclerosis in a Saudi population. Neurosciences (Riyadh). 2020;25:276-280. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in RCA: 1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 29. | Asadi-Pooya AA. Epilepsy and consanguinity in Shiraz, Iran. Eur J Paediatr Neurol. 2005;9:383-386. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 17] [Cited by in RCA: 15] [Article Influence: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 30. | Rafique S, Sultan T, Ahmed S. Consanguineous marriage as risk factor for idiopathic generalized epilepsy (IGE). Pak Armed Forces Med J. 2021;71:1464-1467. |
| 31. | Alruwaili M, Alruwaili R, Alsaidan AA, Alkhaldi MB, Alkhalifah HN, Alnasser RM, AlShammari AM, Alruwaili RM, Basri R. Impact of consanguinity on epilepsy risk in Al-Jouf, Saudi Arabia: a hospital-based cross-sectional study. Int J Med Dev Ctries. 2024;8:2279-2285. [DOI] [Full Text] |
| 32. | Bener A, Hussain R. Consanguineous unions and child health in the State of Qatar. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2006;20:372-378. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 82] [Cited by in RCA: 79] [Article Influence: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 33. | Saad HA, Elbedour S, Hallaq E, Merrick J, Tenenbaum A. Consanguineous Marriage and Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities among Arab Bedouins Children of the Negev Region in Southern Israel: A Pilot Study. Front Public Health. 2014;2:3. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 2] [Cited by in RCA: 6] [Article Influence: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 34. | Deciphering Developmental Disorders Study. Large-scale discovery of novel genetic causes of developmental disorders. Nature. 2015;519:223-228. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 893] [Cited by in RCA: 875] [Article Influence: 79.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (11)] |
| 35. | Ropers HH. Genetics of early onset cognitive impairment. Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet. 2010;11:161-187. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 245] [Cited by in RCA: 255] [Article Influence: 15.9] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 36. | Hu H, Kahrizi K, Musante L, Fattahi Z, Herwig R, Hosseini M, Oppitz C, Abedini SS, Suckow V, Larti F, Beheshtian M, Lipkowitz B, Akhtarkhavari T, Mehvari S, Otto S, Mohseni M, Arzhangi S, Jamali P, Mojahedi F, Taghdiri M, Papari E, Soltani Banavandi MJ, Akbari S, Tonekaboni SH, Dehghani H, Ebrahimpour MR, Bader I, Davarnia B, Cohen M, Khodaei H, Albrecht B, Azimi S, Zirn B, Bastami M, Wieczorek D, Bahrami G, Keleman K, Vahid LN, Tzschach A, Gärtner J, Gillessen-Kaesbach G, Varaghchi JR, Timmermann B, Pourfatemi F, Jankhah A, Chen W, Nikuei P, Kalscheuer VM, Oladnabi M, Wienker TF, Ropers HH, Najmabadi H. Genetics of intellectual disability in consanguineous families. Mol Psychiatry. 2019;24:1027-1039. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 97] [Cited by in RCA: 149] [Article Influence: 21.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 37. | Alshaban FA, Aldosari M, Ghazal I, Al-Shammari H, ElHag S, Thompson IR, Bruder J, Shaath H, Al-Faraj F, Tolefat M, Nasir A, Fombonne E. Consanguinity as a Risk Factor for Autism. J Autism Dev Disord. 2025;55:1945-1952. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 3] [Cited by in RCA: 8] [Article Influence: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 38. | Al-Mamari W, Idris AB, Al-Thihli K, Abdulrahim R, Jalees S, Al-Jabri M, Gabr A, Al Murshedi F, Al Kindy A, Al-Hadabi I, Bruwer Z, Islam MM, Alsayegh A. Applying whole exome sequencing in a consanguineous population with autism spectrum disorder. Int J Dev Disabil. 2023;69:190-200. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 1] [Cited by in RCA: 6] [Article Influence: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 39. | Mamidala MP, Kalikiri MK, Praveen Kumar PT, Rajesh N, Vallamkonda OR, Rajesh V. Consanguinity in India and its association with autism spectrum disorder. Autism Res. 2015;8:224-228. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 17] [Cited by in RCA: 23] [Article Influence: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 40. | Guisso DR, Saadeh FS, Saab D, El Deek J, Chamseddine S, Abou-El-Hassan H, Majari G, Boustany RM. Association of Autism with Maternal Infections, Perinatal and Other Risk Factors: A Case-Control Study. J Autism Dev Disord. 2018;48:2010-2021. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 21] [Cited by in RCA: 27] [Article Influence: 3.9] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 41. | Jenabi E, Khazaei S, Seyedi M, Yadegar Z, Khoshravesh S. The association between parental consanguinity and the risk of autism spectrum disorders: a case-control study. Int J Dev Disabil. 2025;1-9. [DOI] [Full Text] |
| 42. | Nasser SA, Hussein F, Abd El Hady HTS, Meguid NA. Impact of Consanguineous Marriage on Hearing and Language Disorders: Study Among a Group of Egyptian Children. J Otol. 2025;20:110-116. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in RCA: 2] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 43. | Irshad I, Khan MA, Saeed B, Rashid A, Ikram A, Raheem A, Masood F, Atia-Ur-Rehman. Parental perspective regarding consanguineous marriages as the cause for speech and language disorders in Pakistan. Pak J Med Health Sci. 2022;16:1388-1390. [DOI] [Full Text] |
| 44. | David M, Dieterich K, Billette de Villemeur A, Jouk PS, Counillon J, Larroque B, Bloch J, Cans C. Prevalence and characteristics of children with mild intellectual disability in a French county. J Intellect Disabil Res. 2014;58:591-602. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 19] [Cited by in RCA: 16] [Article Influence: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |