Affiliations 

  • 1 Health and Safety Department, Dubai Municipality, Dubai, United Arab Emirates
  • 2 Discipline of Clinical Pharmacy, School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM), Pulau Pinang, 11800, Malaysia
  • 3 Centre of Medical and Bio-Allied Health Sciences Research, Ajman University, Ajman, 346, United Arab Emirates
  • 4 Discipline of Social and Administrative Pharmacy, School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM), Pulau Pinang, 11800, Malaysia
  • 5 Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Medicine, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, 27272, United Arab Emirates
  • 6 Department of Clinical and Community Pharmacy, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, An-Najah National University, Nablus, 44839, Palestine
  • 7 Developmental Biology & Cancer Department, University College London, UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, London, UK
  • 8 Edgware Community Hospital Barnet, Enfield and Haringey Mental Health NHS Trust, London, UK
  • 9 Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, Ajman University, Ajman, 346, United Arab Emirates
J Multidiscip Healthc, 2024;17:1251-1263.
PMID: 38524860 DOI: 10.2147/JMDH.S449348

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Several studies indicate a correlation between consanguinity and genetic disorders, congenital malformations, harm to reproductive health, and increased child mortality.

OBJECTIVE: To assess students' knowledge and attitudes about risks and prevention of consanguineous marriage.

METHODS: Demographic details of the participants and data on knowledge and attitudes concerning the risks and prevention of consanguineous marriage were obtained using an online self-administered questionnaire. The factors associated with good knowledge and attitude toward consanguineous marriage were investigated by logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS: A total of 667 participants enrolled in the study. The average knowledge score about consanguineous marriage risk and prevention was 78.6% with a 95% confidence interval (CI) [77.3, 79.8], and the average attitude was 79.7% with a 95% confidence interval (CI) [79, 80.6]. A better knowledge score was observed in older participants (OR 1.01; 95% CI 1.004-1.024), females (OR 1.69; 95% CI 1.48-1.94), participants with parental history of consanguinity (OR 1.33; 95% CI 1.17-1.52), participants with family history of consanguineous marriage (OR 5.18; 95% CI 2.19-7.10), and participants with family history of inherited disease (OR 1.52; 95% CI 1.25-1.86).

CONCLUSION: In general, the overall level of knowledge and attitudes toward consanguineous marriage risk and prevention was good among university students. To efficiently control and manage the adverse health impacts associated with consanguineous marriage, there is an urgent need to develop and implement evidence-based counseling and screening programs for consanguineous marriage that would significantly reduce the number of at-risk marriages.

* Title and MeSH Headings from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.