Table 6 The characteristics of relevant literatures focusing on the association between CD and ASD
Authors | Publication year | Research area | Sample size | Offspring’s age | Instrument for ASD assessment | Association | Main findings |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Andoy Galvan JA et al. [48] | 2020 | Malaysia | 929 | 9y | DSM or ICD10 | Positive | The odds of autism were higher among those born via CD compared to those born via normal deliveries. |
Yip et al. [29] | 2017 | Western Australia | 345,181 | 5-25y | ICD-8, ICD-9, ICD-10, and DSM-IV | Positive | CD was consistently associated with a modest increased risk of ASD. |
Burstyn et al. [13] | 2010 | Canada | 220,028 | 4-10y | ICD-9 codes 299.0 and 299.8 | Negative | There was no association between mode of delivery and ASD. |
Curran et al. [46] | 2016 | Britain | 13,141 | 7y | Parent report | Negative | No association between mode of delivery and ASD was observed. |
Curran et al. [47] | 2015 | Sweden | 26,822 | 7-15y | ICD-9 code 299 and ICD-10 code F84 | Negative | Children born by CS were found to be approximately 20% more likely diagnosed as having ASD. However, the association did not persist when using sibling controls, implying that this association is due to familial confounding by genetic and/or environmental factors. |