Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29496978›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical genetics2018

Practice guideline: joint CCMG-SOGC recommendations for the use of chromosomal microarray analysis for prenatal diagnosis and assessment of fetal loss in Canada.

Christine M Armour, Shelley Danielle Dougan, Jo-Ann Brock, Radha Chari, Bernie N Chodirker, Isabelle DeBie, Jane A Evans, William T Gibson, Elena Kolomietz, Tanya N Nelson and 4 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical genetics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
15.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

47 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 119 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Medizinische Genetik : Mitteilungsblatt des Berufsverbandes Medizinische Genetik e.V · 2023
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

14 authors at 10 institutions in 2 countries.

Christine M ArmourDepartment of Genetics, Children's Hospital of Eastern and Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Shelley Danielle DouganBORN Ontario, Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Jo-Ann BrockDepartments of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Dalhousie University Medical School, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Radha ChariDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Bernie N ChodirkerDepartment of Pediatrics and Child Health, Max Rady College of Medicine, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
Isabelle DeBieDepartment of Medical Genetics and Core Molecular Diagnostic Laboratory, McGill University Health Centre, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Jane A EvansDepartment of Biochemistry and Medical Genetics, Max Rady College of Medicine, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
William T GibsonDepartment of Medical Genetics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Elena KolomietzDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Mount Sinai Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Tanya N NelsonDepartment of Medical Genetics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Frédérique TihyService de Génétique Médicale, CHU Sainte-Justine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Mary Ann ThomasDepartment of Medical Genetics, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Dimitri J StavropoulosGenome Diagnostics, Department of Pediatric Laboratory Medicine, Hospital for Sick Children, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
On-Behalf-Of the Canadian College of Medical Geneticists
Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario · CAUniversity of British Columbia · CAUniversity of Manitoba · CAAlberta Children's Hospital · CACentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine · CADalhousie University · CAMcGill University Health Centre · CAMount Sinai Hospital · CASickKids Foundation · CAUniversity of Alberta · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe aim of this guideline is to provide updated recommendations for Canadian genetic counsellors, medical geneticists, maternal fetal medicine specialists, clinical laboratory geneticists and other practitioners regarding the use of chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) for prenatal diagnosis. This guideline replaces the 2011 Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada (SOGC)-Canadian College of Medical Geneticists (CCMG) Joint Technical Update.

methodsA multidisciplinary group consisting of medical geneticists, genetic counsellors, maternal fetal medicine specialists and clinical laboratory geneticists was assembled to review existing literature and guidelines for use of CMA in prenatal care and to make recommendations relevant to the Canadian context. The statement was circulated for comment to the CCMG membership-at-large for feedback and, following incorporation of feedback, was approved by the CCMG Board of Directors on 5 June 2017 and the SOGC Board of Directors on 19 June 2017. RESULTS AND

conclusionsRecommendations include but are not limited to: (1) CMA should be offered following a normal rapid aneuploidy screen when multiple fetal malformations are detected (II-1A) or for nuchal translucency (NT) ≥3.5 mm (II-2B) (recommendation 1); (2) a professional with expertise in prenatal chromosomal microarray analysis should provide genetic counselling to obtain informed consent, discuss the limitations of the methodology, obtain the parental decisions for return of incidental findings (II-2A) (recommendation 4) and provide post-test counselling for reporting of test results (III-A) (recommendation 9); (3) the resolution of chromosomal microarray analysis should be similar to postnatal microarray platforms to ensure small pathogenic variants are detected. To minimise the reporting of uncertain findings, it is recommended that variants of unknown significance (VOUS) smaller than 500 Kb deletion or 1 Mb duplication not be routinely reported in the prenatal context. Additionally, VOUS above these cut-offs should only be reported if there is significant supporting evidence that deletion or duplication of the region may be pathogenic (III-B) (recommendation 5); (4) secondary findings associated with a medically actionable disorder with childhood onset should be reported, whereas variants associated with adult-onset conditions should not be reported unless requested by the parents or disclosure can prevent serious harm to family members (III-A) (recommendation 8).The working group recognises that there is variability across Canada in delivery of prenatal testing, and these recommendations were developed to promote consistency and provide a minimum standard for all provinces and territories across the country (recommendation 9).

Indexed as

Genetic CounselingPractice Guidelines as TopicStillbirthChildFemaleFetusGenetic TestingHumansPregnancyPrenatal CarePrenatal Diagnosischromosomal microarrayguidelineprenatal diagnosis

Identifiers

PMID29496978
PMCPMC5869456
OpenAlexW2794433138

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.