ArticleMolecular genetics & genomic medicine2020
Impact of ultrasonography on identifying noninvasive prenatal screening false-negative aneuploidy.
Article in Molecular genetics & genomic medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Residual Risks of Fetal Chromosome Aberrations When Cell-Free DNA Prenatal Screening Is Normal: A Retrospective Study.Prenatal diagnosis · 2025Article
- Impact of ultrasonography on identifying noninvasive prenatal screening false-negative aneuploidy.Molecular genetics & genomic medicine · 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
9 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo evaluate the impact of ultrasonography on identifying noninvasive prenatal screening (NIPS) false-negative aneuploidy.
methodsAnalysis of large population-based NIPS false-negative aneuploidy data comprising karyotypes, clinical outcomes, and ultrasound results.
resultsFrom December 2010 to July 2018, a total of 3,320,457 pregnancies were screened by NIPS performed in BGI; among them, 69 NIPS false-negative aneuploidy cases with informed consent were confirmed, and ultrasound examination data for 48 cases were not available. Of the 21 cases with ultrasound results, 19 (90.5%) had various abnormalities on ultrasound, and two (9.5%) cases were shown to be normal on ultrasound. Additionally, six of seven live-born fetuses (approximately 85.7%) were found to have abnormalities on ultrasound. Ventricular septal defects constituted the most frequently observed ultrasound abnormality type among the 21 NIPS false-negative aneuploidy cases.
conclusionApplication of NIPS has increased rapidly worldwide and now accounts for a large proportion of prenatal screening tests in China. This study suggests that ISUOG guideline should be followed practically, and structural abnormal ultrasound findings should not be neglected, even when NIPS produces a negative result. Combining NIPS with an ultrasound examination can further reduce the incidence of live births with aneuploidy.
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.