ArticleJournal of medical biochemistry2018
Prenatal Screening Markers for Down Syndrome: Sensitivity, Specificity, Positive and Negative Expected Value Method.
Article in Journal of medical biochemistry, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Novel Approaches to an Integrated Route for Trisomy 21 Evaluation.Biomolecules · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGenetic screening for chromosomopathy is performed in the first trimester of pregnancy by determining fetal nuchal translucency (NT), and the pregnancy associated plasma protein-A (PAPP-A) and free human chorionic gonadotropin (free-beta HCG) biomarkers in maternal serum.
methodsWe tested the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative expected values of each marker with the aim of setting a model for prenatal screening readings. Statistical data treatment has been performed on a sample of 340 pregnant women with positive results of prenatal screening.
resultsSensitivity of PAPP-A was 0.6250 (probability 62.50%), free beta HCG 0.5893 (58.93%), NT 0.1785 (17.85%). Specificity of PAPP-A was 0.5106 (probability 51.06%), free beta HCG 0.5246 (52.46%), NT 0.9718 (97.18%). Positive expected value of PAPP-A was 0.2011 (probability 20.11%), free beta HCG 0.1964 (19.64%), NT 0.556 (55.56%). Negative expected value of PAPP-A was 0.8735 (probability 87.35%), free beta HCG 0.8662 (86.62%), NT 0.8571 (85.71%). The NT marker has a significantly higher specificity, which means that its normal value will significantly reduce the final risk of trisomy 21. The sensitivity of NT is much lower than that of biochemical markers, which means that a pathological value of NT does not have a significant influence on the final risk, i.e. the significantly higher sensitivity of biochemical markers will reduce the final risk of trisomy 21.
conclusionsThe analyses stress the importance of using a software which has the possibility to separate the level of a biochemical risk by correlating PAPP-A and free beta HCG and, by adding the NT marker, calculate the level of a final risk of Down syndrome.
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.