Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26237481›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2014

Impact of Cell-Free Fetal DNA Screening on Patients' Choice of Invasive Procedures after a Positive California Prenatal Screen Result.

Forum T Shah, Kathryn Steinhaus French, Kathryn E Osann, Maureen Bocian, Marilyn C Jones, Lauren Korty

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article 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 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
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 5 institutions in 1 country.

Forum T ShahCancer Genetics Department, Saint Joseph Hospital, Orange, CA 92868, USA. forum.shah@stjoe.org.
Kathryn Steinhaus FrenchDepartment of Pediatrics Irvine, University of California, Orange, CA 92868, USA. kasteinh@uci.edu.
Kathryn E OsannDepartment of Pediatrics Irvine, University of California, Orange, CA 92868, USA. kosann@uci.edu.
Maureen BocianDepartment of Pediatrics Irvine, University of California, Orange, CA 92868, USA. mebocian@uci.edu.
Marilyn C JonesSan Diego and Rady Children's Hospital, University of California, San Diego, CA 92037, USA. mjones@rchsd.org.
Lauren KortySan Diego, Fetal Care & Genetics San Diego, University of California, CA 92037, USA. ladennis@ucsd.edu.
Irvine University · USCancer Genetics (United States) · USRady Children's Hospital-San Diego · USUniversity of California, Irvine · USUniversity of California, San Diego · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Until recently, maternal serum analyte levels paired with sonographic fetal nuchal translucency measurement was the most accurate prenatal screen available for Trisomies 18 and 21, (91% and 94% detection and false positive rates of 0.31% and 4.5% respectively). Women with positive California Prenatal Screening Program (CPSP) results have the option of diagnostic testing to determine definitively if the fetus has a chromosomal abnormality. Cell-free fetal (cff-) DNA screening for Trisomies 13, 18, and 21 was first offered in 2012, allowing women with positive screens to choose additional screening before diagnostic testing. Cff-DNA sensitivity rates are as high as 99.9% and 99.1%, with false positive rates of 0.4% and 0.1%, for Trisomies 18 and 21, respectively. A retrospective chart review was performed in 2012 on 500 CPSP referrals at the University of California, San Diego Thornton Hospital. Data were collected prior to and after the introduction of cff-DNA. There was a significant increase in the number of participants who chose to pursue additional testing and a decrease in the number of invasive procedures performed after cff-DNA screening was available. We conclude that as fetal aneuploidy screening improves, the number of invasive procedures will continue to decrease.

Indexed as

cell-free fetal DNA screeningnon-invasive prenatal testingprenatal

Identifiers

PMID26237481
PMCPMC4449655
OpenAlexW2026914110

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.