Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30115457›Full record

ReviewSeminars in perinatology2018

Introducing new and emerging genetic tests into prenatal care.

Neeta L Vora, Ronald J Wapner

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Seminars in perinatology, 2018. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Prenatal treatment path for angelman syndrome and other neurodevelopmental disorders.Autism research : official journal of the International Society for Autism Research · 2020
    Review
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.

Neeta L VoraDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 3010 Old Clinic Building, CB 7516, Chapel Hill, NC 27516, United States. Electronic address: nvora@med.unc.edu.
Ronald J WapnerDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Reproductive Genetics, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY, United States.

Funding

UNC BIRCWH CAREER DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMK12HD001441 · NICHD · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI BOGGESS, KIM A · 2000 to 2019
$9.3M
Early Genomic DiagnosisK23HD088742 · NICHD · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI VORA, NEETA L · 2017 to 2020
$685k
NICHD NIH HHS K12 HD001441NICHD NIH HHS K23 HD088742
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Given the rapid advances in genomics, translating new genomic tests effectively into prenatal clinical practice remains challenging. We discuss emerging genetic tests, considerations for their use, how tests should ideally be validated prior to use in clinical practice, and the role of the Federal Drug Administration, Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA) laboratories, commercial laboratories, insurers, and professional societies such as the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM) in the introduction of new prenatal genetic tests. After the introduction of new tests into the prenatal clinic, it is critical to utilize shared databases with measured outcomes to improve clinical care as well as to advance science.

Indexed as

Guideline AdherencePrenatal CareChromosome DisordersDirect-To-Consumer Screening and TestingFemaleGenetic CounselingGenetic TestingHumansPractice Guidelines as TopicPregnancyPrenatal DiagnosisSocieties, Medicalgeneticsimplementationprenatalsequencing

Identifiers

PMID30115457
PMCPMC6370457

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.