Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26237381›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2014

Beyond Trisomy 21: Additional Chromosomal Anomalies Detected through Routine Aneuploidy Screening.

Amy Metcalfe, Catriona Hippman, Melanie Pastuck, Jo-Ann Johnson

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

4 authors.

Amy MetcalfeDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of British Columbia, BC Women's Hospital 4500 Oak St., Vancouver, BC V6H 3N1, Canada. ametcalfe@cfri.ca.
Catriona HippmanDepartment of Psychiatry, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada. catriona.hippman@ubc.ca.
Melanie PastuckEarly Risk Assessment Program, Suite 100 3820 Hospital Dr NW, Calgary, AB T2N 4N1, Canada. melanie.pastuck@albertahealthservices.ca.
Jo-Ann JohnsonDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Foothills Medical Centre-North Tower, University of Calgary, 1403 29th St. NW, Calgary, AB T2N 2T9, Canada. joann.johnson@albertahealthservices.ca.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prenatal screening is often misconstrued by patients as screening for trisomy 21 alone; however, other chromosomal anomalies are often detected. This study aimed to systematically review the literature and use diagnostic meta-analysis to derive pooled detection and false positive rates for aneuploidies other than trisomy 21 with different prenatal screening tests. Non-invasive prenatal testing had the highest detection (DR) and lowest false positive (FPR) rates for trisomy 13 (DR: 90.3%; FPR: 0.2%), trisomy 18 (DR: 98.1%; FPR: 0.2%), and 45,X (DR: 92.2%; FPR: 0.1%); however, most estimates came from high-risk samples. The first trimester combined test also had high DRs for all conditions studied (trisomy 13 DR: 83.1%; FPR: 4.4%; trisomy 18 DR: 91.9%; FPR: 3.5%; 45,X DR: 70.1%; FPR: 5.4%; triploidy DR: 100%; FPR: 6.3%). Second trimester triple screening had the lowest DRs and highest FPRs for all conditions (trisomy 13 DR: 43.9%; FPR: 8.1%; trisomy 18 DR: 70.5%; FPR: 3.3%; 45,X DR: 77.2%; FPR: 9.3%). Prenatal screening tests differ in their ability to accurately detect chromosomal anomalies. Patients should be counseled about the ability of prenatal screening to detect anomalies other than trisomy 21 prior to undergoing screening.

Indexed as

aneuploidymaternal serumnon-invasive testingprenatalsensitivityspecificityultrasound

Identifiers

PMID26237381
PMCPMC4449689

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.