Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 180

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Protective effect of periconceptional folic acid supplements on the risk of congenital heart defects: a registry-based case-control study in the northern Netherlands

van Beynum, I. M., Kapusta, L., Bakker, M. K., den Heijer, M., Blom, H. J., de Walle, H. E.K.·2010·European Heart Journal

Abstract

AIMS: To investigate the potentially protective of periconceptional folic acid use on the risk of congenital heart defects (CHDs) relative to other non-folate related malformations. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analysed data from a large regional register of birth defects (EUROCAT-Northern Netherlands), over a 10 year period (1996-2005) for a case-control study. The cases were mothers who had delivered infants with isolated or complex heart defects, without any related syndrome or genetic abnormality (n = 611). We used two control groups; one from the EUROCAT database and another from the general population. The registry controls consisted of mothers of children with a known chromosomal or genetic defect, and with infants with other non-folate related congenital malformations (n = 2401). Additional folic acid was taken as a single supplement or as a multivitamin containing folic acid in a dose of >or=400 microg daily. Mothers who had used folate antagonists or who had diabetes, and mothers of children with oral clefts, hypospadias, limb reduction- or neural tube defects, were excluded from both groups. Potentially confounding factors of periconceptional folic acid use in relation to CHD were explored, including baby's birth year, maternal body mass index, education, maternal age at delivery of index baby, smoking behaviour, and alcohol use during pregnancy. Periconceptional folic acid use revealed an odds ratio (OR) of 0.82 (95% CI 0.68-0.98) for all types of CHD relative to other malformations. The estimated relative risk for CHDs of additional folic acid use compared with the general population was comparable [OR 0.74 (95%CI 0.62-0.88)]. Subgroup analysis showed an OR of 0.62 (95% CI 0.47-0.82) for isolated septal defects. The proportions of the potential confounders between mothers of case and control infants did not differ significantly. CONCLUSION: Our results support the hypothesis that additional periconceptional folic acid use reduces CHD risk in infants. Use of periconceptional folic acid supplements was related to approximately 20% reduction in the prevalence of any CHD. Given the relatively high prevalence of CHD worldwide, our findings are important for public health.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/eurheartj/ehp479

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 180

Metadata

Authors
van Beynum, I. M., Kapusta, L., Bakker, M. K., den Heijer, M., Blom, H. J., & de Walle, H. E. K.
Venue
European Heart Journal
Published
2009-12-01
Volume
31
Issue
4
Pages
464-471
ISSN
  • 0195-668X (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-9645
OpenAlex
W2146148857
Cited by
180
References
2
FWCI
7.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Protective effect of periconceptional folic acid supplements on the risk of congenital heart defects: a registry-based case-control study in the northern Netherlands. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/eurheartj/ehp479
The paper
van Beynum, I. M., Kapusta, L., Bakker, M. K., den Heijer, M., Blom, H. J., & de Walle, H. E. K. (2010). Protective effect of periconceptional folic acid supplements on the risk of congenital heart defects: a registry-based case-control study in the northern Netherlands. European Heart Journal. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehp479

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.