Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27051557›Full record

ArticleScientifica2016

SNP Microarray in FISH Negative Clinically Suspected 22q11.2 Microdeletion Syndrome.

Ashutosh Halder, Manish Jain, Amanpreet Kaur Kalsi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientifica, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

3 authors.

Ashutosh HalderReproductive Biology, AIIMS, New Delhi 110029, India.ORCID 0000-0002-3116-3502
Manish JainReproductive Biology, AIIMS, New Delhi 110029, India.
Amanpreet Kaur KalsiReproductive Biology, AIIMS, New Delhi 110029, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The present study evaluated the role of SNP microarray in 101 cases of clinically suspected FISH negative (noninformative/normal) 22q11.2 microdeletion syndrome. SNP microarray was carried out using 300 K HumanCytoSNP-12 BeadChip array or CytoScan 750 K array. SNP microarray identified 8 cases of 22q11.2 microdeletions and/or microduplications in addition to cases of chromosomal abnormalities and other pathogenic/likely pathogenic CNVs. Clinically suspected specific deletions (22q11.2) were detectable in approximately 8% of cases by SNP microarray, mostly from FISH noninformative cases. This study also identified several LOH/AOH loci with known and well-defined UPD (uniparental disomy) disorders. In conclusion, this study suggests more strict clinical criteria for FISH analysis. However, if clinical criteria are few or doubtful, in particular newborn/neonate in intensive care, SNP microarray should be the first screening test to be ordered. FISH is ideal test for detecting mosaicism, screening family members, and prenatal diagnosis in proven families.

Identifiers

PMID27051557
PMCPMC4804090

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.