Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36975849›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of neonatal screening2023

Harmonization of Newborn Screening Results for Pompe Disease and Mucopolysaccharidosis Type I.

M Christine Dorley, George J Dizikes, Charles Austin Pickens, Carla Cuthbert, Khaja Basheeruddin, Fizza Gulamali-Majid, Paul Hetterich, Amy Hietala, Ashley Kelsey, Tracy Klug and 7 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of neonatal screening, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
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

17 authors.

M Christine DorleyTennessee Department of Health, Division of Laboratory Services, Nashville, TN 37243, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7924-8521
George J DizikesTennessee Department of Health, Division of Laboratory Services, Knoxville, TN 37920, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3581-6651
Charles Austin PickensDivision of Laboratory Sciences, National Center for Environmental Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA 30341, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1632-5777
Carla CuthbertDivision of Laboratory Sciences, National Center for Environmental Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA 30341, USA.
Khaja BasheeruddinIllinois Department of Public Health, Chicago, IL 60612, USA.
Fizza Gulamali-MajidMaryland Department of Health, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA.
Paul HetterichVirginia Department of General Services, Division of Consolidated Laboratory Services, Richmond, VA 23219, USA.
Amy HietalaMinnesota Department of Health, St. Paul, MN 55155, USA.
Ashley KelseyMichigan Department of Health & Human Services, Lansing, MI 48906, USA.
Tracy KlugMissouri State Public Health Laboratory, Jefferson City, MO 65101, USA.
Barbara LeskoDepartment of Pathology, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA.
Michelle MillsKansas Health and Environmental Laboratories, Topeka, KS 66620, USA.
Shawn MoloneyMichigan Department of Health & Human Services, Lansing, MI 48906, USA.
Partha NeogiCalifornia Department of Public Health, Richmond, CA 94804, USA.
Joseph OrsiniWadsworth Center, New York State Department of Health, Albany, NY 12208, USA.
Douglas SingerOhio Department of Health, Reynoldsburg, OH 43068, USA.
Konstantinos PetritisDivision of Laboratory Sciences, National Center for Environmental Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA 30341, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8660-8532

Funding

CDC HHS CDC-RFA-EH18-1804
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In newborn screening, false-negative results can be disastrous, leading to disability and death, while false-positive results contribute to parental anxiety and unnecessary follow-ups. Cutoffs are set conservatively to prevent missed cases for Pompe and MPS I, resulting in increased falsepositive results and lower positive predictive values. Harmonization has been proposed as a way to minimize false-negative and false-positive results and correct for method differences, so we harmonized enzyme activities for Pompe and MPS I across laboratories and testing methods (Tandem Mass Spectrometry (MS/MS) or Digital Microfluidics (DMF)). Participating states analyzed proofof- concept calibrators, blanks, and contrived specimens and reported enzyme activities, cutoffs, and other testing parameters to Tennessee. Regression and multiples of the median were used to harmonize the data. We observed varied cutoffs and results. Six of seven MS/MS labs reported enzyme activities for one specimen for MPS I marginally above their respective cutoffs with results classified as negative, whereas all DMF labs reported this specimen's enzyme activity below their respective cutoffs with results classified as positive. Reasonable agreement in enzyme activities and cutoffs was achieved with harmonization; however, harmonization does not change how a value would be reported as this is dependent on the placement of cutoffs.

Indexed as

digital microfluidicsharmonizationMPS Imultiples of the mediannewborn screeningpomperegressiontandem mass spectrometry

Identifiers

PMID36975849
PMCPMC10059896

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.