SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2015
First trimester serum tests for Down's syndrome screening.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 7 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
23 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 81 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quality of Evidence for Prenatal Down Syndrome Screening: An Umbrella Review.Prenatal diagnosis · 2026Pooled it
- Prognostic Impact of Pregnancy-Associated Plasma Protein-A (PAPP-A) for Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (GDM): An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of More Than 90 000 Pregnancies.American journal of reproductive immunology (New York, N.Y. : 1989) · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Empirical assessment of bias in machine learning diagnostic test accuracy studies.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2020Pooled 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
- Antibiotics for amniotic-fluid colonization by Ureaplasma and/or Mycoplasma spp. to prevent preterm birth: A randomized trial.PloS one · 2018Trial
- 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
- Balancing How Much We Want to Know with What We Are Willing to Pay: A Comparative Cost Analysis of Prenatal Cytogenetic Testing and Screening Strategies.Fetal diagnosis and therapy · 2026Article
- Predictive value of the maternal alpha-fetoprotein variant, L2, during the first trimester of pregnancy screening for fetal trisomy 21, trisomy 18, and neural tube defects.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- First and Second-Trimester Screening, for Down's Syndrome: An Umbrella Review on Meta-Analyses.Health science reports · 2025Review
- Artificial intelligence in prenatal diagnosis: Down syndrome risk assessment with the power of gradient boosting-based machine learning algorithms.Turkish journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2025Article
- Applying machine learning in screening for Down Syndrome in both trimesters for diverse healthcare scenarios.Heliyon · 2024Article
- COMBINED FIRST TRIMESTER SCREENING FOR FETAL DOWN SYNDROME AT THE SPLIT UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL CENTER: A SEVEN-YEAR EXPERIENCE.Acta clinica Croatica · 2023Review
- Application of chromosome microarray analysis and karyotyping in diagnostic assessment of abnormal Down syndrome screening results.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2022Article
- A dPCR-NIPT assay for detections of trisomies 21, 18 and 13 in a single-tube reaction-could it replace serum biochemical tests as a primary maternal plasma screening tool?Journal of translational medicine · 2022Article
- Predicting Hypertensive Disease in the First Trimester of Pregnancy: Risk Models and Analysis of Serum D-dimer Levels Combined with Plasma Pregnancy-Associated Protein A, FreeBioMed research international · 2022Article
- Patient Preferences for Prenatal and Postpartum Care Delivery: A Survey of Postpartum Women.Obstetrics and gynecology · 2020Article
- Comparison of First Trimester Screening for Down's Syndrome Using Free Beta-Human Chorionic Gonadotropin and Pregnancy-Associated Plasma Protein-A Levels between Spontaneous and IVF Pregnancies at 12 Weeks of Gestation.International journal of fertility & sterility · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 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, rather than two copies of chromosome 21; or the specific area of chromosome 21 implicated in causing Down's syndrome. It is the commonest congenital cause of mental disability and also leads to numerous metabolic and structural problems. It can be life-threatening, or lead to considerable ill health, although some individuals have only mild problems and can lead relatively normal lives. Having a baby with Down's syndrome is likely to have a significant impact on family life.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. However, no test can predict the severity of problems a person with Down's syndrome will have.
objectivesThe aim of this review was to estimate and compare the accuracy of first trimester serum markers for the detection of Down's syndrome in the antenatal period, both as individual markers and as combinations of markers. Accuracy is described by the proportion of fetuses with Down's syndrome detected by screening before birth (sensitivity or detection rate) and the proportion of women with a low risk (normal) screening test result who subsequently had a baby unaffected by Down's syndrome (specificity). SEARCH
methodsWe conducted a sensitive and comprehensive literature search of MEDLINE (1980 to 25 August 2011), Embase (1980 to 25 August 2011), BIOSIS via EDINA (1985 to 25 August 2011), CINAHL via OVID (1982 to 25 August 2011), The Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (The Cochrane Library 25 August 2011), MEDION (25 August 2011), The Database of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses in Laboratory Medicine (25 August 2011), The National Research Register (Archived 2007), Health Services Research Projects in Progress database (25 August 2011). We did forward citation searching ISI citation indices, Google Scholar and PubMed 'related articles'. We did not apply a diagnostic test search filter. We also searched reference lists and published review articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included studies in which all women from a given population had one or more index test(s) compared to a reference standard (either chromosomal verification or macroscopic postnatal inspection). Both consecutive series and diagnostic case-control study designs were included. Randomised trials where individuals were randomised to different screening strategies and all verified using a reference standard were also eligible for inclusion. Studies in which test strategies were compared head-to-head either in the same women, or between randomised groups were identified for inclusion in separate comparisons of test strategies. We excluded studies if they included less than five Down's syndrome cases, or more than 20% of participants were not followed up. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data as test positive or 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 (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies) criteria. We used hierarchical summary ROC meta-analytical methods or random-effects logistic regression methods to analyse test performance and compare test accuracy as appropriate. Analyses of studies allowing direct and indirect comparisons between tests were undertaken. MAIN
resultsWe included 56 studies (reported in 68 publications) involving 204,759 pregnancies (including 2113 with Down's syndrome). Studies were generally of good quality, although differential verification was common with invasive testing of only high-risk pregnancies. We evaluated 78 test combinations formed from combinations of 18 different tests, with or without maternal age; ADAM12 (a disintegrin and metalloprotease), AFP (alpha-fetoprotein), inhibin, PAPP-A (pregnancy-associated plasma protein A, ITA (invasive trophoblast antigen), free βhCG (beta human chorionic gonadotrophin), PlGF (placental growth factor), SP1 (Schwangerschafts protein 1), total hCG, progesterone, uE3 (unconjugated oestriol), GHBP (growth hormone binding protein), PGH (placental growth hormone), hyperglycosylated hCG, ProMBP (proform of eosinophil major basic protein), hPL (human placental lactogen), (free αhCG, and free ßhCG to AFP ratio. Direct comparisons between two or more tests were made in 27 studies.Meta-analysis of the nine best performing or frequently evaluated test combinations showed that a test strategy involving maternal age and a double marker combination of PAPP-A and free ßhCG significantly outperformed the individual markers (with or without maternal age) detecting about seven out of every 10 Down's syndrome pregnancies at a 5% false positive rate (FPR). Limited evidence suggested that marker combinations involving PAPP-A may be more sensitive than those without PAPP-A. AUTHORS'
conclusionsTests involving two markers in combination with maternal age, specifically PAPP-A, free βhCG and maternal age are significantly better than those involving single markers with and without age. They detect seven out of 10 Down's affected pregnancies for a fixed 5% FPR. The addition of further markers (triple tests) has not been shown to be statistically superior; the studies included are small with limited power to detect a difference.The screening blood tests themselves have no adverse effects for the woman, over and above the risks of a routine blood test. However some women who have a 'high risk' screening test result, and are given amniocentesis or chorionic villus sampling (CVS) have a risk of miscarrying a baby unaffected by Down's. Parents will need to weigh up this risk when deciding whether or not to have an amniocentesis or CVS following a 'high risk' screening test result.
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.