ReviewHeliyon2023
Reappraisal of evolving methods in non-invasive prenatal screening: Discovery, biology and clinical utility.
Review in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- AI-guided meta-analysis of non-invasive prenatal testing platforms for trisomy 21 screening: comparative evaluation of cffDNA and fetal cell-based approaches.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Pooled it
- Review
- Non-invasive prenatal testing of beta-hemoglobinopathies using next generation sequencing, in-silico sequence size selection, and haplotyping.Croatian medical journal · 2024Article
- Technical Advances in Circulating Cell-Free DNA Detection and Analysis for Personalized Medicine in Patients' Care.Biomolecules · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Non-invasive prenatal screening (NIPS) offers an opportunity to screen or determine features associated with the fetus. Earlier, prenatal testing was done with cytogenetic procedures like karyotyping or fluorescence in-situ hybridization, which necessitated invasive methods such as fetal blood sampling, chorionic villus sampling or amniocentesis. Over the last two decades, there has been a paradigm shift away from invasive prenatal diagnostic methods to non-invasive ones. NIPS tests heavily rely on cell-free fetal DNA (cffDNA). This DNA is released into the maternal circulation by placenta. Like cffDNA, fetal cells such as nucleated red blood cells, placental trophoblasts, leukocytes, and exosomes or fetal RNA circulating in maternal plasma, have enormous potential in non-invasive prenatal testing, but their use is still limited due to a number of limitations. Non-invasive approaches currently use circulating fetal DNA to assess the fetal genetic milieu. Methods with an acceptable detection rate and specificity such as sequencing, methylation, or PCR, have recently gained popularity in NIPS. Now that NIPS has established clinical significance in prenatal screening and diagnosis, it is critical to gain insights into and comprehend the genesis of NIPS de novo. The current review reappraises the development and emergence of non-invasive prenatal screen/test approaches, as well as their clinical application, with a focus, on the scope, benefits, and limitations.
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.