Prenatal screening for chromosomal abnormalities in IVF patients that opted for preimplantation genetic screening/diagnosis (PGS/D): a need for revised algorithms in the era of personalized medicine.

Open access · bronzeAbstract read

In one paragraph

Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

1citing papers in PubMed

2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

Do patients who achieve pregnancy using IVF-PGS do the recommended genetic diagnostic testing in pregnancy?Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2018
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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Afua TakyiRutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, USA.

Joaquin Santolaya-ForgasPerinatal Institute, Jersey Shore University Medical Center, 1944 Route 33, Suite 204, Neptune, NJ, 07753, USA. Joaquin.Santolaya@hackensackmeridian.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0840-0423

Jersey Shore University Medical Center · USRutgers, The State University of New Jersey · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Obstetricians offer prenatal screening for most common chromosomal abnormalities to all pregnant women including those that had in vitro fertilization (IVF) and preimplantation genetic screening/diagnosis (PGS/D). We propose that free fetal DNA in maternal circulation together with the second trimester maternal serum alfa feto protein (MSAFP) and ultrasound imaging is the best prenatal screening test for chromosomal abnormalities and congenital anomalies in IVF-PGD/S patients because risk estimations from all other prenatal screening algorithms for chromosomal abnormalities depend heavily on maternal age which is irrelevant in PGS/D patients.

Indexed as

Chromosome AberrationsFertilization in Vitroalpha-FetoproteinsAneuploidyChromosome DisordersFemaleHumansMaternal AgeMaternal Serum Screening TestsPrecision MedicinePregnancyPreimplantation DiagnosisPrenatal Diagnosisalpha-FetoproteinsAssisted reproductive technologiesIVFNoninvasive prenatal screeningPreimplantation genetic diagnosisPreimplantation genetic screeningPrenatal screening for aneuploidy

Identifiers

PMID28357616

DOI10.1007/s10815-017-0907-5

PMCPMC5445046

OpenAlexW2597646033

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

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.