Dr. Pangloss's Clinic: Prenatal Whole Genome Sequencing and a Return to Reality.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing for "Non-Medical" Traits: Ensuring Consistency in Ethical Decision-Making.The American journal of bioethics : AJOB · 2023
   Article
2. Health professionals and scientists' views on genome-wide NIPT in the French public health system: Critical analysis of the ethical issues raised by prenatal genomics.PloS one · 2022
   Review
3. Just choice: a Danielsian analysis of the aims and scope of prenatal screening for fetal abnormalities.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2019
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Commented on by
  Response to Open Peer Commentaries on "A Framework for Unrestricted Prenatal Whole-Genome Sequencing: Respecting and Enhancing the Autonomy of Prospective Parents".2017
• Comment on
  A Framework for Unrestricted Prenatal Whole-Genome Sequencing: Respecting and Enhancing the Autonomy of Prospective Parents.2017

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Funding

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as