Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Early educational attainment in children with major congenital anomaly in the UK
  1. Zoë E Wands1,2,
  2. Daniel G W Cave1,2,
  3. Kirsten Cromie1,
  4. Amy Hough3,
  5. Kathryn Johnson2,4,
  6. Mark Mon-Williams1,3,
  7. Richard G Feltbower1,
  8. Adam W Glaser1,2
  1. 1 Leeds Institute for Data Analytics (LIDA), University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
  2. 2 Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK
  3. 3 Born in Bradford, Wolfson Centre for Applied Health Research, Bradford Royal Infirmary, Bradford, UK
  4. 4 National Congenital Anomaly and Rare Disease Registration Service, London, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Zoë E Wands, Leeds Institute for Data Analytics (LIDA), University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9NL, West Yorkshire, UK; zoe.wands{at}nhs.net

Abstract

Objective To describe early educational attainment and special educational needs (SEN) provision in children with major congenital anomaly (CA) compared with peers.

Design Analysis of educational data linked to the ongoing Born in Bradford cohort study. Confounders were identified via causal inference methods and multivariable logistic regression performed.

Setting Children born in Bradford Royal Infirmary (BRI), West Yorkshire.

Patients All women planning to give birth at BRI and attending antenatal clinic from March 2007 to December 2010 were eligible. 12 453 women with 13 776 pregnancies (>80% of those attending) were recruited. Records of 555 children with major CA and 11 188 without were linked to primary education records.

Outcomes Key Stage 1 (KS1) attainment at age 6–7 years in Maths, Reading, Writing and Science. SEN provision from age 4 to 7 years.

Results 41% of children with major CA received SEN provision (compared with 14% without), and 48% performed below expected standards in at least one KS1 domain (compared with 29% without). The adjusted odds of children with CA receiving SEN provision and failing to achieve the expected standard at KS1 were, respectively, 4.30 (95% CI 3.49 to 5.31) and 3.06 (95% CI 2.47 to 3.79) times greater than their peers. Those with genetic, heart, neurological, urinary, gastrointestinal and limb anomalies had significantly poorer academic achievement.

Conclusions These novel results demonstrate that poor educational attainment extends to children with urinary, limb and gastrointestinal CAs. We demonstrate the need for collaboration between health and education services to assess and support children with major CA, so every CA survivor can maximise their potential.

  • Child Health
  • Child Development
  • Genetics
  • Healthcare Disparities
  • Paediatrics

Data availability statement

Data may be obtained from a third party and are not publicly available. All data are held by Born in Bradford.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Data availability statement

Data may be obtained from a third party and are not publicly available. All data are held by Born in Bradford.

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • Twitter @dr_kej

  • Contributors ZEW—conceptualisation, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, project administration, software, visualisation, writing (original draft) and writing (review and editing), content guarantor. DGWC—conceptualisation, data curation, investigation, methodology, project administration, software, supervision, validation, visualisation and writing (review and editing). KC—methodology, software, supervision, validation and writing (review and editing). AH—data curation, software, validation and writing (review and editing). KJ—conceptualisation, supervision, validation and writing (review and editing). MM-W—conceptualisation, supervision and writing (review and editing). RF—conceptualisation, methodology, project administration, software, supervision, validation and writing (review and editing). AG—conceptualisation, methodology, project administration, supervision and writing (review and editing).

  • Funding The Born in Bradford study was commissioned by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration for Applied Health Research and Care and the Programme Grants for Applied Research funding scheme (RP-PG-0407–-10044).27 ZEW and DGWC’s posts were funded by NHS England Y&H and NIHR, respectively. The research described in this paper received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.