SynthesisBMC pregnancy and childbirth2020
Targeted antenatal anti-D prophylaxis for RhD-negative pregnant women: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- FIGO/ICM guidelines for preventing Rhesus disease: A call to action.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2021Guideline
- A real-time PCR-based noninvasive prenatal RHD screening assay optimized for population-specific RHD allelic spectra in China.BMC medical genomics · 2026Article
- Novel proof of concept assay for rapid, simplified non-invasive fetal RhD screening.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Noninvasive fetal blood group antigen genotyping.Blood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangue · 2025Review
- Clinical Validation of a Prenatal Cell-Free DNA Screening Test for Fetal RHD in a Large U.S. Cohort.Obstetrics and gynecology · 2025Article
- Article
- Red Blood Cell Alloimmunization in Pregnancy: A Review of the Pathophysiology, Prevalence, and Risk Factors.Cureus · 2024Review
- Prevalence of fetomaternal Rhesus incompatibility at the tertiary care hospital: a cross-sectional study.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2024Article
- Validation of a non-invasive prenatal test for fetal RhD, C, c, E, K and FyScientific reports · 2023Article
- Review
- Diagnostic performance of the noninvasive prenatal FetoGnost RhD assay for the prediction of the fetal RhD blood group status.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2021Article
- Laboratory Monitoring of Mother, Fetus, and Newborn in Hemolytic Disease of Fetus and Newborn.Transfusion medicine and hemotherapy : offizielles Organ der Deutschen Gesellschaft fur Transfusionsmedizin und Immunhamatologie · 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
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAll non-sensitized Rhesus D (RhD)-negative pregnant women in Germany receive antenatal anti-D prophylaxis without knowledge of fetal RhD status. Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) of cell-free fetal DNA in maternal plasma could avoid unnecessary anti-D administration. In this paper, we systematically reviewed the evidence on the benefit of NIPT for fetal RhD status in RhD-negative pregnant women.
methodsWe systematically searched several bibliographic databases, trial registries, and other sources (up to October 2019) for controlled intervention studies investigating NIPT for fetal RhD versus conventional anti-D prophylaxis. The focus was on the impact on fetal and maternal morbidity. We primarily considered direct evidence (from randomized controlled trials) or if unavailable, linked evidence (from diagnostic accuracy studies and from controlled intervention studies investigating the administration or withholding of anti-D prophylaxis). The results of diagnostic accuracy studies were pooled in bivariate meta-analyses.
resultsNeither direct evidence nor sufficient data for linked evidence were identified. Meta-analysis of data from about 60,000 participants showed high sensitivity (99.9%; 95% CI [99.5%; 100%] and specificity (99.2%; 95% CI [98.5%; 99.5%]).
conclusionsNIPT for fetal RhD status is equivalent to conventional serologic testing using the newborn's blood. Studies investigating patient-relevant outcomes are still lacking.
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.