ArticlePrenatal diagnosis2021
Challenges in providing residual risks in carrier testing.
Article in Prenatal diagnosis, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Narratives before numbers: Reimagining conversations about race, ethnicity, and ancestry information in genetic counseling practice.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Article
- Perceived utility of genetic carrier screening in a diverse patient population.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Article
- Advancements in Prenatal Genetic Screening and Testing: Emerging Technologies and Evolving Applications.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Experience using conventional compared to ancestry-based population descriptors in clinical genomics laboratories.American journal of human genetics · 2025Review
- [Carrier screening for 223 monogenic diseases in Chinese population: a multi-center study in 33 104 individuals].Nan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University · 2024Article
- Reproductive Counseling and Care in Cystic Fibrosis: A Multidisciplinary Approach for a New Therapeutic Era.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Challenges in providing residual risks in carrier testing.Prenatal diagnosis · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The probability an individual is a carrier for a recessive disorder despite a negative carrier test, referred to as residual risk, has been part of carrier screening for over 2 decades. Residual risks are calculated by subtracting the frequency of carriers of pathogenic variants detected by the test from the carrier frequency in a population, estimated from the incidence of the disease. Estimates of the incidence (and therefore carrier frequency) of many recessive disorders differ among different population groups and are inaccurate or unavailable for many genes on large carrier screening panels for most of the world's populations. The pathogenic variants detected by the test and their frequencies also vary across groups and over time as variants are newly discovered or reclassified, which requires today's residual carrier risks to be continually updated. Even when a residual carrier risk is derived using accurate data obtained in a particular group, it may not apply to many individuals in that group because of misattributed ancestry or unsuspected admixture. Missing or inaccurate data, the challenge of determining meaningful ancestry-specific risks and applying them appropriately, and a lack of evidence they impact management, suggest that patients be counseled that although carrier screening may miss a small fraction of carriers, residual risks with contemporary carrier screening are well below the risk posed by invasive prenatal diagnosis, even if one member of the couple is a carrier, and that efforts to provide precise residual carrier risks are unnecessary.
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.