SynthesisJAMA network open2021
Principles of Genomic Newborn Screening Programs: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in JAMA network open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 69 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
69 citing papers in PubMed, 102 citations in OpenAlex.
- Parental reactions to and preferences for genomic newborn screening in Germany: findings from a scenario-based survey experiment.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- Healthcare professionals' views on expanding newborn screening with or without genomics in France: Results of the SeDeN-p2 study.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- Scaling up genomic newborn screening: implementation lessons from the BabyScreen+ study.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- Who and how we engage: A systemic mapping of stakeholder perspectives on genomic newborn screening.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- A qualitative study exploring young adult's attitudes towards adopting whole genome sequencing into newborn screening programs.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- Australian parents' perspectives on extended genomic screening: what information to return and when?European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- How parents decide whether to have genomic newborn screening: experiences from BabyScreen.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- Genomic newborn screening: a scoping review of the field's evolution and associated ethical, legal, and social implications.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- Benchmarking genetic birth prevalence estimates against newborn screening data.American journal of human genetics · 2026Article
- Article
- A multi-dimensional framework for establishing and managing a genomic newborn screening program.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- Parental experiences of receiving genomic newborn screening results: findings from the BabyScreen+ study.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- Article
- A population-representative survey on attitudes toward genomic newborn screening in Germany.Genetics in medicine open · 2026Article
- Impact of data sources and ascertainment methods on reporting paediatric genetic condition prevalence: A scoping review.Health information management : journal of the Health Information Management Association of Australia · 2026Article
- What Is at Stake in Genetic Newborn Screening for Rare Diseases? An Exploratory Qualitative Study of Parents' and Expectant Parents' Concerns in the Screen4Care Project.Public health genomics · 2026Article
- Article
- Feasibility, acceptability and clinical outcomes of the BabyScreen+ genomic newborn screening study.Nature medicine · 2025Article
- Universal newborn screening for familial hypercholesterolaemia-insights from healthcare professionals in Queensland, Australia.Journal of community genetics · 2025Article
- Article
9 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Genomic newborn screening (gNBS) may optimize the health and well-being of children and families. Screening programs are required to be evidence based, acceptable, and beneficial. Objectives: To identify what has been discovered following the reporting of the first gNBS pilot projects and to provide a summary of key points for the design of gNBS. Evidence Review: A systematic literature review was performed on April 14, 2021, identifying 36 articles that addressed the following questions: (1) what is the interest in and what would be the uptake of gNBS? (2) what diseases and genes should be included? (3) what is the validity and utility of gNBS? and (4) what are the ethical, legal, and social implications? Articles were only included if they generated new evidence; all opinion pieces were excluded. Findings: In the 36 articles included, there was high concordance, except for gene disease inclusion, which was highly variable. Key findings were the need for equitable access, appropriate educational materials, and informed and flexible consent. The process for selecting genes for testing should be transparent and reflect that parents value the certainty of prediction over actionability. Data should be analyzed in a way that minimizes uncertainty and incidental findings. The expansion of traditional newborn screening (tNBS) to identify more life-threatening and treatable diseases needs to be balanced against the complexity of consenting parents of newborns for genomic testing as well as the risk that overall uptake of tNBS may decline. The literature reflected that the right of a child to self-determination should be valued more than the possibility of the whole family benefiting from a newborn genomic test. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this systematic review suggest that implementing gNBS will require a nuanced approach. There are gaps in our knowledge, such as the views of diverse populations, the capabilities of health systems, and health economic implications. It will be essential to rigorously evaluate outcomes and ensure programs can evolve to maximize benefit.
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.