Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24497706›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of human genetics2013

Chromosomal abnormalities in couples with repeated fetal loss: An Indian retrospective study.

Frenny J Sheth, Thomas Liehr, Pritti Kumari, Ralph Akinde, Harsh J Sheth, Jayesh J Sheth

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Indian journal of human genetics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 59 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Subtelomeric Rearrangements in Patients with Recurrent Miscarriage.International journal of fertility & sterility · 2018
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Balanced Autosomal Translocations in Two Women Reporting Recurrent Miscarriage.Journal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR · 2016
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Frenny J ShethFRIGE's Institute of Human Genetics, Cytogenetic and Molecular Cytogenetic section, FRIGE House, Satellite, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India.
Thomas LiehrJena University Hospital, Institute of Human Genetics, Kollegiengasse 10, D-07743 Jena, Germany.
Pritti KumariFRIGE's Institute of Human Genetics, Cytogenetic and Molecular Cytogenetic section, FRIGE House, Satellite, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India.
Ralph AkindeFRIGE's Institute of Human Genetics, Cytogenetic and Molecular Cytogenetic section, FRIGE House, Satellite, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India.
Harsh J ShethInstitute of Genetic Medicine, International Centre for Life, Newcastle Upon Tyne, Tyne and Wear, NE1 4EP, UK.
Jayesh J ShethFRIGE's Institute of Human Genetics, Cytogenetic and Molecular Cytogenetic section, FRIGE House, Satellite, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India.
Jena University Hospital · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRecurrent pregnancy loss is a common occurrence and a matter of concern for couples planning the pregnancy. Chromosomal abnormalities, mainly balanced rearrangements, are common in couples with repeated miscarriages. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the contribution of chromosomal anomalies causing repeated spontaneous miscarriages and provide detailed characterization of a few structurally altered chromosomes. MATERIALS AND

methodsA retrospective cytogenetic study was carried out on 4859 individuals having a history of recurrent miscarriages. The cases were analyzed using G-banding and fluorescence in situ hybridization wherever necessary.

resultsChromosomal rearrangements were found in 170 individuals (3.5%). Translocations were seen in 72 (42.35%) cases. Of these, reciprocal translocations constituted 42 (24.70%) cases while Robertsonian translocations were detected in 30 (17.64%) cases. 7 (4.11%) cases were mosaic, 8 (4.70%) had small supernumerary marker chromosomes and 1 (0.6%) had an interstitial microdeletion. Nearly, 78 (1.61%) cases with heteromorphic variants were seen of which inversion of Y chromosome (57.70%) and chromosome 9 pericentromeric variants (32.05%) were predominantly involved.

conclusionsChromosomal analysis is an important etiological investigation in couples with repeated miscarriages. Characterization of variants/marker chromosome enable calculation of a more precise recurrent risk in a subsequent pregnancy thereby facilitating genetic counseling and deciding further reproductive options.

Indexed as

Break pointschromosomal abnormalitiesrecurrent loss of pregnancysmall supernumerary marker chromosometranslocations

Identifiers

PMID24497706
PMCPMC3897136
OpenAlexW2040258676

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.