Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T15:10:24.538Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Trends in Monozygotic and Dizygotic Twinning Rates by Maternal Age and Parity — Further Analysis of Italian Data, 1949-1985, and Rediscussion of US Data, 1964-1985

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

G. Allen  and
P. Parisi
G. Allen
Affiliation:
US Public Health Service (Ret.), Bethesda, Maryland, USA
P. Parisi*
Affiliation:
Department of Public Health, Medical School, Second University of Rome, Rome, Italy The Gregor Mendel Institute of Medical Genetics and Twin Studies, Rome, Italy
*
Gregor Mendel Institute, Piazza Galeno 5, 00162 Rome, Italy

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The dizygotic twinning rate in Italy, adjusted for maternal age and parity, declined from 8.9/1000 in 1949-1953 to 6.0/1000 in 1978-81, but may have stabilized or recovered slightly in the early 1980s. The long decline was greatest in the oldest mothers, and the recent increase, if any, has been principally in first births and in women under 30. The monozygotic rate rose from 3.8/1000 in 1969-73 to 4.3/1000 in 1982-85, having been relatively stable prior to that period. No good explanation for these trends is apparent.

Keywords

TwinningMaternal ageParitySecular trends
Type
Research Article
Information
Acta geneticae medicae et gemellologiae: twin research , Volume 39 , Issue 3 , July 1990 , pp. 317 - 328
Copyright
Copyright © The International Society for Twin Studies 1990

References

REFERENCES

1.Allen, G (1981): The twinning and fertility paradox. In Gedda, L, Parisi, P, Nance, WE (eds): Twin Research 3: Twin Biology and Multiple Pregnancy. New York: Alan R Liss, pp 1–13.Google Scholar
2.Allen, G (1984): Multiple births. In Bracken, MB (ed): Perinatal Epidemiology. New York and Oxford: Oxford Univ Press, pp 152–189.Google Scholar
3.Allen, G (1987): The non-decline in U.S. twin birth rates, 1964-1983. Acta Genet Med Gemellol 36:313–323.Google Scholar
4.Bracken, MB (1979): Oral contraception and twinning: An epidemiologic study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 133:432–434.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Elwood, JM (1973): Changes in the twinning rate in Canada 1926-1970. Br J Prev Soc Med 27:236–241.Google Scholar
6.Elwood, JM (1983): The end of the drop in twinning rates? Lancet i:470.Google Scholar
7.Emery, AEH (1986): Identical twinning and oral contraception. Biol Soc 3:23–27.Google Scholar
8.Eriksson, AW, Fellman, JO (1967): Twinning and legitimacy. Hereditas 57:395–402.Google Scholar
9.Eriksson, AW, Eskola, MR, Fellman, JO (1976): Retrospective studies on the twinning rate in Scandinavia. Acta Genet Med Gemellol 25:29–35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.Harlap, S, Eldor, J (1980): Births following oral contraceptive failures. Obstet Gynecol 55: 447–452.Google Scholar
11.James, WH (1972): Secular changes in dizygotic twinning rates. J Biosoc Sci 4:427–434.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.James, WH (1975): The secular decline in dizygotic twinning rates in Italy. Acta Genet Med Gemellol 24:9–14.Google Scholar
13.James, WH (1978): A hypothesis on the declining dizygotic twinning rates in developed countries. In Nance, WE (ed): Twin Research: Biology and Epidemiology. New York: Alan R Liss, pp 81–88.Google Scholar
14.Jeanneret, O, MacMahon, B (1962): Secular changes in rates of multiple births in the United States. Am J Hum Genet 14:410–425.Google ScholarPubMed
15.Parisi, P, Caperna, G (1982): Twinning rates, fertility, and industrialization: A secular study. Proceedings of the Sixth International Congress of Human Genetics, Jerusalem, 1981. New York: Alan R Liss, pp 375–394.Google Scholar
16.Rothman, KJ (1977): Fetal loss, twinning and birth weight after oral contraception use. N Engl J Med 297:468–471.Google Scholar