ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2018
Older mothers and increased impact of prenatal screening: stable livebirth prevalence of trisomy 21 in the Netherlands for the period 2000-2013.
Article in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Detection of Embryonic Trisomy 21 in the First Trimester Using Maternal Plasma Cell-Free RNA.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Does non-invasive prenatal testing affect the livebirth prevalence of Down syndrome in the Netherlands? A population-based register study.Prenatal diagnosis · 2021Article
- Why NIPT should be publicly funded.Journal of medical ethics · 2020Article
- Should pregnant women be charged for non-invasive prenatal screening? Implications for reproductive autonomy and equal access.Journal of medical ethics · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the Netherlands, there is no registry system regarding the livebirth prevalence of trisomy 21 (T21). In 2007, a national screening programme was introduced for all pregnant women, which may have changed the livebirth prevalence of T21. The aim of this study is to analyse trends in factors that influence livebirth prevalence of T21 and to estimate the livebirth prevalence of T21 for the period of 2000-2013. National data sets were used on the following: (1) livebirths according to maternal age and (2) prenatal testing and termination of pregnancy (ToP) following diagnosis of T21. These data are combined in a model that uses maternal age-specific risk on T21 and correction factors for natural foetal loss to assess livebirth prevalence of T21. The proportion of mothers aged ≥ 36 years has increased from 12.2% in 2000 to 16.6% in 2009, to gradually decrease afterwards to 15.2% in 2013. The number of invasive tests performed adjusted for total livebirths decreased (5.9% in 2000 vs. 3.2% in 2013) with 0.18% a year (95% CI: -0.21 to -0.15; p < 0.001). Following invasive testing, a higher proportion of foetuses was diagnosed with T21 (1.6% in 2000 vs. 4.8% in 2013) with a significant increase of 0.22% a year (95% CI: 0.18-0.26; p < 0.001). The proportion of ToP subsequent to T21 diagnosis was on average 85.7%, with no clear time trend. This resulted in a stable T21 livebirth prevalence of 13.6 per 10,000 livebirths (regression coefficient -0.025 (95% CI: -0.126 to 0.77; p = 0.60).
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.