SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2012
Second trimester serum tests for Down's Syndrome screening.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
26 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 72 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quality of Evidence for Prenatal Down Syndrome Screening: An Umbrella Review.Prenatal diagnosis · 2026Pooled it
- Diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound screening for fetal structural abnormalities during the first and second trimester of pregnancy in low-risk and unselected populations.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Non-invasive prenatal testing for the prenatal screening of sex chromosome aneuploidies: A systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies.Molecular genetics & genomic medicine · 2021Pooled it
- Genomics-based non-invasive prenatal testing for detection of fetal chromosomal aneuploidy in pregnant women.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- First trimester ultrasound tests alone or in combination with first trimester serum tests for Down's syndrome screening.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- First and second trimester serum tests with and without first trimester ultrasound tests for Down's syndrome screening.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Urine tests for Down's syndrome screening.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- First trimester serum tests for Down's syndrome screening.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- A prospective clinical trial to compare the performance of dried blood spots prenatal screening for Down's syndrome with conventional non-invasive testing technology.Experimental biology and medicine (Maywood, N.J.) · 2017Trial
- First and Second-Trimester Screening, for Down's Syndrome: An Umbrella Review on Meta-Analyses.Health science reports · 2025Review
- Effects of Antiseizure Medications on Second-Trimester Prenatal Screening Test Parameters: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Applying machine learning in screening for Down Syndrome in both trimesters for diverse healthcare scenarios.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Correlation between maternal serum biomarkers and the risk of fetal chromosome copy number variants: a single-center retrospective study.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2024Article
- Biochemical Screening for Fetal Trisomy 21: Pathophysiology of Maternal Serum Markers and Involvement of the Placenta.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- External Quality Assessment of Maternal Serum Levels of Alpha-Fetoprotein, Free Beta-Human Chorionic Gonadotropin, and Unconjugated Estriol in Detecting Down Syndrome and Neural Tube Defects in the Second Trimester of 87 Maternal Serum Samples, Based on 105-139 Days.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2022Article
- How to Manage Low Estriol Levels in Pregnancies, One Center Experience.Medeniyet medical journal · 2022Article
- Tiny Toes to Tau Tangles: Down's Syndrome and Its Association With Alzheimer's Disease.Cureus · 2022Review
- Psychometric Assessment of the Mandarin Version of the Decisional Conflict Scale with Pregnant Women Making Prenatal Test Decisions.Patient preference and adherence · 2022Article
- Novel Approaches to an Integrated Route for Trisomy 21 Evaluation.Biomolecules · 2021Review
- Application of intelligent algorithms in Down syndrome screening during second trimester pregnancy.World journal of clinical cases · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDown's syndrome occurs when a person has three copies of chromosome 21 - or the specific area of chromosome 21 implicated in causing Down's syndrome - rather than two. It is the commonest congenital cause of mental retardation. Noninvasive screening based on biochemical analysis of maternal serum or urine, or fetal ultrasound measurements, allows estimates of the risk of a pregnancy being affected and provides information to guide decisions about definitive testing.
objectivesTo estimate and compare the accuracy of second trimester serum markers for the detection of Down's syndrome. SEARCH
methodsWe carried out a sensitive and comprehensive literature search of MEDLINE (1980 to May 2007), EMBASE (1980 to 18 May 2007), BIOSIS via EDINA (1985 to 18 May 2007), CINAHL via OVID (1982 to 18 May 2007), The Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (The Cochrane Library 2007, Issue 1), MEDION (May 2007), The Database of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses in Laboratory Medicine (May 2007), The National Research Register (May 2007), Health Services Research Projects in Progress database (May 2007). We studied reference lists and published review articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies evaluating tests of maternal serum in women at 14-24 weeks of gestation for Down's syndrome, compared with a reference standard, either chromosomal verification or macroscopic postnatal inspection. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data were extracted as test positive/test negative results for Down's and non-Down's pregnancies allowing estimation of detection rates (sensitivity) and false positive rates (1-specificity). We performed quality assessment according to QUADAS criteria. We used hierarchical summary ROC meta-analytical methods to analyse test performance and compare test accuracy. Analysis of studies allowing direct comparison between tests was undertaken. We investigated the impact of maternal age on test performance in subgroup analyses. MAIN
resultsFifty-nine studies involving 341,261 pregnancies (including 1,994 with Down's syndrome) were included. Studies were generally high quality, although differential verification was common with invasive testing of only high-risk pregnancies. Seventeen studies made direct comparisons between tests. Fifty-four test combinations were evaluated formed from combinations of 12 different tests and maternal age; alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), unconjugated oestriol (uE3), total human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG), free beta human chorionic gonadotrophin (βhCG), free alpha human chorionic gonadotrophin (αhCG), Inhibin A, SP2, CA125, troponin, pregnancy-associated plasma protein A (PAPP-A), placental growth factor (PGF) and proform of eosinophil major basic protein (ProMBP).Meta-analysis of 12 best performing or frequently evaluated test combinations showed double and triple tests (involving AFP, uE3, total hCG, free βhCG) significantly outperform individual markers, detecting six to seven out of every 10 Down's syndrome pregnancies at a 5% false positive rate. Tests additionally involving inhibin performed best (eight out of every 10 Down's syndrome pregnancies) but were not shown to be significantly better than standard triple tests in direct comparisons. Significantly lower sensitivity occurred in women over the age of 35 years. Women who miscarried in the over 35 group were more likely to have been offered an invasive test to verify a negative screening results, whereas those under 35 were usually not offered invasive testing for a negative screening result. Pregnancy loss in women under 35 therefore leads to under ascertainment of screening results, potentially missing a proportion of affected pregnancies and affecting the accuracy of the sensitivity. AUTHORS'
conclusionsTests involving two or more markers in combination with maternal age are significantly more sensitive than those involving one marker. The value of combining four or more tests or including inhibin have not been proven to show statistically significant improvement. Further study is required to investigate reduced test performance in women aged over 35 and the impact of differential pregnancy loss on study findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.