BOLALARDA INTELLEKTUAL YETISHMOVCHILIK RIVOJLANISH XAVFIGA QARINDOSHLIK NIKOHLARINING TA’SIRI
##article.subject##:
Intellektual yetishmovchilik; qarindoshlik nikohlari; autosomal retsessiv irsiylanish; genetik omillar; epidemiologiya; genetik maslahat##article.abstract##
Intellektual yetishmovchilik zamonaviy jamiyatning dolzarb tibbiy-ijtimoiy muammolaridan biri bo‘lib, bemorlar va ularning oilalari hayot sifatiga sezilarli ta’sir ko‘rsatadi. Uning shakllanishida genetik omillar, jumladan, qarindoshlar o‘rtasidagi nikoh ham muhim rol o‘ynaydi. Ushbu sharhning maqsadi qarindoshlar o‘rtasidagi nikohning avlodlarda aqliy zaiflik rivojlanish xavfiga ta’siri haqidagi zamonaviy ilmiy ma’lumotlarni tahlil qilishdir. Maqolada asosiy genetik mexanizmlar, jumladan autosom-retsessiv irsiylanish ko‘rib chiqilgan, qarindoshlar o‘rtasidagi nikohlar soni yuqori bo‘lgan populyatsiyalardan olingan epidemiologik ma’lumotlar keltirilgan, shuningdek, ushbu muammoning ijtimoiy va madaniy jihatlari tahlil qilingan. Profilaktika va genetik maslahatning roli masalalariga alohida e’tibor qaratildi. Tadqiqot natijalari qarindoshlar o‘rtasidagi nikohlar intellektual yetishmovchilik xavfining ortishi bilan bog‘liqligini tasdiqlaydi, bu esa profilaktika dasturlarini ishlab chiqish va aholining genetik savodxonligini oshirish zarurligini ta’kidlaydi.
Библиографические ссылки
World Health Organization. International Classification of Diseases 11th Revision (ICD-11). Geneva: WHO; 2019.
American Psychiatric Association. DSM-5: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Washington, DC; 2013.
Ropers H.H. Genetics of intellectual disability. Current Opinion in Genetics & Development. 2010;20(3):241–250.
Sheridan E., Wright J., Small N. et al. Risk factors for congenital anomaly in consanguineous unions. The Lancet. 2013;382(9901): 115–123.
Bittles A.H. Consanguinity and its relevance to clinical genetics. Clinical Genetics. 2001;60(2):89–98.
Hamamy H. Consanguineous marriages: Preconception consultation in primary health care settings. Journal of Community Genetics. 2012;3(3):185–192.
Leonard H., Wen X. The epidemiology of intellectual disability. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research. 2002;46(2):117– 134.
Rauch A., Hoyer J., Guth S. et al. Diagnostic yield of genetic testing in intellectual disability. American Journal of Human Genetics. 2006;79(4):768–775.
Genetics of intellectual disability in consanguineous families Hao Hu et al. Mol Psychiatry. 2019 Jul)
Greene D. et al. Mutations in the U4 snRNA gene RNU4-2 cause one of the most prevalent monogenic neurodevelopmental disorders — Nature Medicine, 2024
Is consanguinity an impediment to child development? Journal Dev Orig Health Dis. 2024–2025; consanguinity linked to lower cognitive test scores and growth in children. (139-159)
Effect of inbreeding on intellectual disability revisited by trio sequencing. Wiley/PubMed 2018; exome shows 3.6–4.25 higher ID risk in children of related parents (151-159)
Meta-analysis of 2,104 trios provides support for 10 new genes for intellectual disability. Nature Neuroscience, 1194- 1196,2016
GBD 2019 Intellectual Disability Collaborators.Significant regional inequalities in the prevalence of intellectual disability and trends from 1990 to 2019: a systematic analysis of the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019.The Lancet Global Health, 2022
World Health Organization / MDPI Review.Epidemiology and global prevalence of intellectual disability.Healthcare (MDPI), 2023
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).Prevalence of diagnosed intellectual disability among children and adolescents: United States, 2019–2021.NCHS Data Brief, 2023.
Durkin M.S., Hasan Z.M., Hasan K.Z.Perspectives of intellectual disability in Asia: epidemiology and causes.Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 2009.
Whitehead M., et al. Significant regional inequalities in the prevalence of intellectual disability and trends from 1990 to 2019: a systematic analysis of GBD 2019. Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences. 2022.
Smith J., et al. Changes in the prevalence of intellectual disability among 10-year-old children in Sweden during 2011–2021. Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders. 2024.
Fareed M, Afzal M. Genetics of consanguinity and inbreeding in health and disease. Ann Hum Biol. 2017; 44(2): 99–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/03014460.2016.1265148.].
Romdhane L, Mezzi N, Hamdi Y, El-Kamah G, Barakat A, Abdelhak S. Consanguinity and Inbreeding in health and disease in North African populations. Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet. 2019;20(1):155–79. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-genom-083118- 014954.].
Bittles AH, Black ML. Consanguineous marriage and human evolution. Annu Rev Anthropol. 2010;39:193–207. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.012809.105051. Darr A, Small N, Ahmad WIU, Atkin K, Corry P, Modell B. Addressing key issues in the consanguinity-related risk of autosomal recessive disorders in consanguineous communities: lessons from a qualitative study of British Pakistanis. J Community Genet. 2016;7:65–79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12687-015-0252-2.
Alfares A, Alfadhel M, Wani T, Alsahli S, Alluhaydan I, Al Mutairi F, Alothaim A, Albalwi M, Alturki S, Al-Twaijri W, Alrifai M. A multicenter clinical exome study in unselected cohorts from a consanguineous population of Saudi Arabia demonstrated a high diagnostic yield. Mol Genet Metabol. 2017;121(2):91–5. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. ymgme. 2017. 04. 002.
Monies D, Abouelhoda M, AlSayed M, Alhassnan Z, Alotaibi M, Kayyali H, Al-Owain M, et al. The landscape of genetic diseases in Saudi Arabia based on the first 1000 diagnostic panels and exomes. Human Genet. 2017;136(8):921–39. https:// doi. org/
1007/ s00439- 017- 1821-8.
