ArticleAnnals of translational medicine2019
The assessment of combined karyotype analysis and chromosomal microarray in pregnant women of advanced maternal age: a multicenter study.
Article in Annals of translational medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genomic risk profiling in advanced maternal age: a Tamil Nadu prenatal study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- A retrospective analysis of 6942 amniocentesis cases.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- Application of Chromosomal Karyotype Analysis Combined With Chromosomal Microarray Analysis in the Amniotic Fluid of Advanced Maternal Age.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2025Article
- Evaluating Chromosomal Mosaicism in Prenatal Diagnosis: The Complementary Roles of Chromosomal Microarray Analysis and Karyotyping.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2025Review
- Clinical application of single nucleotide polymorphism array in prenatal diagnosis: Experience with 8753 samples.PloS one · 2025Article
- Chromosomal microarray analysis for prenatal diagnosis of uniparental disomy: a retrospective study.Molecular cytogenetics · 2024Article
- Chromosome microarray analysis combined with karyotype analysis is a powerful tool for the detection in pregnant women with high-risk indicators.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2023Article
- Prenatal diagnosis of fetuses with ultrasound anomalies by whole-exome sequencing in Luoyang city, China.Frontiers in genetics · 2023Article
- Clinical evaluation of non-invasive prenatal screening for the detection of fetal genome-wide copy number variants.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2022Article
- Prenatal Diagnosis Using Chromosomal Microarray Analysis in High-Risk Pregnancies.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Assessment of Combined Karyotype Analysis and Chromosome Microarray Analysis in Prenatal Diagnosis: A Cohort Study of 3710 Pregnancies.Genetics research · 2022Article
- Prenatal Diagnostic Testing Following High-Risk Result from Serological Screening: Which Shall We Select?International journal of women's health · 2021Article
- Comprehensive Evaluation of Non-invasive Prenatal Screening to Detect Fetal Copy Number Variations.Frontiers in genetics · 2021Article
- The difference between karyotype analysis and chromosome microarray for mosaicism of aneuploid chromosomes in prenatal diagnosis.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2020Article
- Clinical Utility of SNP Array Analysis in Prenatal Diagnosis: A Cohort Study of 5000 Pregnancies.Frontiers in genetics · 2020Article
- The Necessity of Prenatal Diagnosis by CMA for the Women with NIPS-Positive Results.International journal of genomics · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRetrospectively analyzed the results of prenatal diagnosis and hoped to provide scientific clinical guidance of prenatal screening and diagnosis for the women in advanced maternal age (AMA).
methodsIn total, 4,224 women of AMA who accepted prenatal diagnosis by amniocentesis (AC) from two prenatal diagnosis centers were recruited for this study. After genetic counseling and informed consent, 3,475 women received karyotype analysis only, 703 were examined by both karyotype analysis and chromosomal microarray (CMA), while 46 cases selected CMA only. Both centers used the same detection platform, experimental scheme, and quality control standards.
resultsA total of 164 women with chromosomal abnormal results were found, the abnormality rate was 3.88% (164/4,224). Among them, 145 (3.4%, 145/4,224) cases were detected as abnormal chromosome number, 19 cases (0.4%, 19/4,224) as abnormal chromosome structure. Compared with simple AMA women, the abnormality rate was significantly increased in the AMA women who combined with other indications, particularly in number abnormalities (22.5%
conclusionsAbout 3.88% fetuses of AMA women had chromosomal abnormalities, the abnormality rate increased with their age. The application of CMA could increase the diagnostic rate by about 1.4% for AMA women, and greatly reduce their tension.
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.