BACKGROUND Consanguineous marriage is common in Saudi Arabia and is associated with an increased risk of inherited disorders. However, its relationship with specific neurological and developmental outcomes in children remains incompletely characterized. AIM To examine the association between parental consanguinity and neurological and developmental disorders among pediatric patients in the Jazan region of Saudi Arabia. METHODS This retrospective cohort study reviewed the medical records of children younger than 14 years who were diagnosed with non-acquired neurological or developmental disorders at King Fahad Central Hospital between January 2022 and December 2023. Patients were categorized according to parental consanguinity status (second cousins or closer vs non-consanguineous). Demographic and clinical characteristics were compared using χ 2 or Fisher’s exact tests, with a significance threshold of P < 0.05. RESULTS 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/intellectual disability were the most frequent developmental disorders. Although minor differences were observed in the distribution of epilepsy types and developmental disorders between the consanguineous and non-consanguineous groups, these differences were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION 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.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alhamoud et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: