Skip to main content
. 2018 Sep 27;103(11):4043–4088. doi: 10.1210/jc.2018-01865

Table 1.

Comparative Incidence of Classic CAH in Different Populations

Country Complete National Data? Sample Size 1/Incidence PPV % (Term Infants or Overall) Reference
Argentina (Buenos Aires) No 80,436 8937 50 (2)
Australia (Western Australia)a No 550,153 14,869 N/A (3)
Australia (New South Wales) No 185,854 15,488 1.8 (4)
Australiaa Yes 18,034 N/A (4)
Brazil No 748,350 14,967 (5)
Brazil (state of Goias) No 82,603 10,325 28.6 (6)
Brazil (state of Minas Gerais) No 159,415 19,927 2.1 (7)
Brazil (state of Rio Grande do Sul) No 108,409 13,551 1.6 (8)
China No 30,000 6084 (9)
Croatia Yes 532,942 14,403 (10)
Cuba Yes 621,303 15,931 0.3 (11)
Czech Republic Yes 545,026 11,848 1.6 (12)
France Yes 6,012,798 15,699 2.3 (13)
Germany (Bavaria) No 1,420,102 12,457 5 (14)
India No 55,627 6334 (15)
Japan (Sapporo) No 498,147 20,756 8 (16)
Japan (Tokyo) No 2,105,108 21,264 25.8 (17)
New Zealand Yes 1,175,988 26,727 (18)
Sweden Yes 2,737,932 14,260 25.1 (19)
United Kingdoma Yes 18,248 N/A (20)
United Arab Emirates Yes 750,365 9030 (21)
Uruguay Yes 190,053 15,800 (22)

Data are from newborn screening except those designated as coming from national case registries. Data are from studies published in 2008 and later. Earlier studies are summarized by van der Kamp and Wit 2004 (23) and Gidlof et al. 2014 (19).

Abbreviations: N/A, not available; PPV, positive predictive value (for newborn screening; see section 1).

a

Data are from national case registries.