SynthesisEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2016
International differences in the evaluation of conditions for newborn bloodspot screening: a review of scientific literature and policy documents.
Synthesis in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.
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.
- Celebrating 50 Years of Nationwide Newborn Screening in Hungary-Review, Current Situation, and Future Directions.International journal of neonatal screening · 2025Review
- Dried Blood Spots in Neonatal Studies: A Computational Analysis for the Role of the Hematocrit Effect.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- The case for screening in early life for 'non-treatable' disorders: ethics, evidence and proportionality. A report from the Health Council of the Netherlands.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2022Article
- Towards responsible ctDNA-based multi-cancer screening: a preliminary exploration and discussion of ethically relevant aspects.Extracellular vesicles and circulating nucleic acids · 2022Review
- Exome/Genome-Wide Testing in Newborn Screening: A Proportionate Path Forward.Frontiers in genetics · 2022Article
- Comparison of dried blood spot and plasma sampling for untargeted metabolomics.Metabolomics : Official journal of the Metabolomic Society · 2021Article
- Neonatal and carrier screening for rare diseases: how innovation challenges screening criteria worldwide.Journal of community genetics · 2021Article
- Informing Parents about Newborn Screening: A European Comparison Study.International journal of neonatal screening · 2021Article
- Expanded Neonatal Bloodspot Screening Programmes: An Evaluation Framework to Discuss New Conditions With Stakeholders.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2021Article
- The Cost-Effectiveness of Expanding the UK Newborn Bloodspot Screening Programme to Include Five Additional Inborn Errors of Metabolism.International journal of neonatal screening · 2020Article
- Neonatal Lead (Pb) Exposure and DNA Methylation Profiles in Dried Bloodspots.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- Next Generation Sequencing in Newborn Screening in the United Kingdom National Health Service.International journal of neonatal screening · 2019Article
- Early Check: translational science at the intersection of public health and newborn screening.BMC pediatrics · 2019Observational
- Parental perspectives on retention and secondary use of neonatal dried bloodspots: a Dutch mixed methods study.BMC pediatrics · 2019Article
- An Age-Based Framework for Evaluating Genome-Scale Sequencing Results in Newborn Screening.The Journal of pediatrics · 2019Article
- Genomic Testing for Human Health and Disease Across the Life Cycle: Applications and Ethical, Legal, and Social Challenges.Frontiers in public health · 2019Review
- European Union Should Actively Stimulate and Harmonise Neonatal Screening Initiatives.International journal of neonatal screening · 2018Article
- Global birth prevalence and mortality from inborn errors of metabolism: a systematic analysis of the evidence.Journal of global health · 2018Review
- Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy Newborn Screening, a Case Study for Examining Ethical and Legal Issues for Pilots for Emerging Disorders: Considerations and Recommendations.International journal of neonatal screening · 2018Review
- Are lower TSH cutoffs in neonatal screening for congenital hypothyroidism warranted?European journal of endocrinology · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite international adoption of newborn bloodspot screening (DBS), no two countries' screening programs are the same. This article aims to understand what factors influence DBS decision-making criteria and how conditions are assessed against them. In doing so, it offers unique insights into the international landscape of DBS. A systematic review on DBS criteria in scientific literature was first undertaken. Through this, five topics were identified for consideration when analyzing DBS decision-making. Using these five topics as a template, a side-by-side comparison was conducted on DBS in policy documents of eight countries. Programs are using different approaches to explore the same policy issues, including: the beneficiary of DBS, definition of criteria, the way conditions are assessed, level of evidence required, and recommendations after assessment. These differences have the potential to result in increased disparity across DBS internationally. Ultimately, governments need to decide on their role and develop an approach to DBS decision-making in line with this role. The analyses presented in this article highlight that despite programs' commonalities, no one 'DBS decision-making solution' exists. Understanding the different approaches to decision-making within the literature and policy settings, provides an objective starting point for structured decision-making approaches for DBS programs.
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.