Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35236661›Full record

ArticleBMJ global health2022

Global impact of COVID-19 on newborn screening programmes.

Vanesa Koracin, J Gerard Loeber, Matej Mlinaric, Tadej Battelino, James R Bonham, Urh Groselj, COVID-NBS ISNS global network

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ global health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Newborn Screening in a Pandemic-Lessons Learned.International journal of neonatal screening · 2023
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Newborn Screening: From the Past to the Future.Turkish archives of pediatrics · 2022
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Towards Achieving Equity and Innovation in Newborn Screening across Europe.International journal of neonatal screening · 2022
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Vanesa Koracin *Department of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, UMC - University Children's Hospital Ljubljana; Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
J Gerard LoeberInternational Society for Neonatal Screening (ISNS) Office, Bilthoven, The Netherlands.
Matej Mlinaric *Department of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, UMC - University Children's Hospital Ljubljana; Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Tadej BattelinoDepartment of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, UMC - University Children's Hospital Ljubljana; Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
James R BonhamSheffield Children's Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK.
Urh GroseljDepartment of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, UMC - University Children's Hospital Ljubljana; Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia urh.groselj@kclj.si.ORCID 0000-0002-5246-9869
COVID-NBS ISNS global network

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe global COVID-19 pandemic has presented extraordinary disruption to healthcare services and exposed them to numerous challenges. Newborn screening (NBS) programmes were also affected; however, scarce data exist on the impact of COVID-19 on NBS.

methodsWe conducted an international survey to assess the global impact of COVID-19 on NBS, with the main aim of gathering the experiences of the COVID-19 pandemic from a large and representative number of NBS centres worldwide.

resultsThe results of our study showed that COVID-19 impacted the NBS programmes, at least partially, in 29 out of 38 responding countries. Majority of the screening centres experienced a broad spectrum of difficulties and most were affected more in the second wave of the pandemic. Delays and unreliability with the postal service as well as flight cancellations caused delays in samples arriving to screening centres and with the provision of laboratory equipment and reagents. The availability of laboratory staff was sometimes reduced due to infection, quarantine or reassignment within the healthcare facility. Sample collection at home, second-tier tests and follow-up were also affected. Social restrictions and interruptions in public transport added to these difficulties. Only a limited number of centres managed to retain a fully functioning NBS programme.

conclusionAs the pandemic might continue or could recur in future years, it would be useful to develop guidelines to protect these valuable services.

Indexed as

COVID-19HumansInfant, NewbornNeonatal ScreeningPandemicsQuarantineSARS-CoV-2child healthCOVID-19health systemsprevention strategiesscreening

Identifiers

PMID35236661
PMCPMC8895417

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.