ArticleCMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne2021
Performance of a universal prenatal screening program incorporating cell-free fetal DNA analysis in Ontario, Canada.
Article in CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- Pooled it
- Obstetric trauma and its association with race and immigration: a population-based cohort study in Ontario, Canada.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- Expanded non-invasive prenatal testing offers better detection of fetal copy number variations but not chromosomal aneuploidies.PloS one · 2025Article
- Real-life implementation of prenatal cell-free DNA screening with in vitro fetal enrichment virtually eliminates the need for redraws and improves performance: A cohort study.Genetics in medicine open · 2025Article
- Pregnancies with 'double-positive' multiple marker screening results: a population-based study in Ontario, Canada.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Article
- Ultrasonographic Fetal Nuchal Translucency Measurements and Cytogenetic Outcomes.JAMA network open · 2024Article
- Expansion of non-invasive prenatal screening to the screening of 10 types of chromosomal anomalies: a cost-effectiveness analysis.BMJ open · 2023Article
- A Critical Evaluation of Validation and Clinical Experience Studies in Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing for Trisomies 21, 18, and 13 and Monosomy X.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- The Effect of Elevated Alanine Transaminase on Non-invasive Prenatal Screening Failures.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
- Correction to "Performance of a universal prenatal screening program incorporating cell-free fetal DNA analysis in Ontario, Canada".CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe emergence of cell-free fetal DNA (cfDNA) testing technology has disrupted the landscape of prenatal screening for trisomies 21 (T21) and 18 (T18). Publicly funded systems around the world are grappling with how to best integrate this more accurate but costly technology, as there is limited evidence about its incremental value in real-world conditions. The objectives of this study were to describe the population-based performance of Ontario's prenatal screening program, which incorporates publicly funded cfDNA screening for specific indications, and the effect of cfDNA testing on the screening and diagnostic choices made by pregnant people.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective, descriptive cohort study using routinely collected data from Better Outcomes & Registry Network (BORN) Ontario, which captures linked population data for prenatal and neonatal health encounters across Ontario. We included all singleton pregnancies with an estimated due date between Sept. 1, 2016, and Mar. 31, 2019, that underwent publicly funded prenatal screening in Ontario, and a comparison cohort from Apr. 1, 2012, and Mar. 31, 2013. We assessed performance of the screening program for the detection of T21 or T18 by calculating sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value against diagnostic cytogenetic results or birth outcomes. We assessed the impact of the program by calculating the proportion of T21 screen-positive pregnancies undergoing subsequent cfDNA screening and invasive prenatal diagnostic testing.
resultsThe study cohort included 373 682 pregnancies. The prenatal screening program had an uptake of 69.9%, a screen-positive rate and sensitivity of 1.6% and 89.9% for T21, and 0.2% and 80.5% for T18, respectively. The test failure rate for cfDNA screening was 2.2%. Invasive prenatal diagnostic testing decreased from 4.4% in 2012-2013 to 2.4% over the study period; 65.2% of pregnant people who received a screen-positive result from cfDNA testing went on to have invasive prenatal diagnostic testing.
interpretationThis publicly funded screening program, incorporating cfDNA analysis for common aneuploidies, showed robust performance, a substantial reduction in invasive prenatal diagnostic testing and that pregnant people exercise autonomy in their choices about prenatal screening and diagnosis.
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.