ReviewInternational journal of neonatal screening2023
Newborn Screening in a Pandemic-Lessons Learned.
Review 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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence, Connected Care, and Enabling Digital Health Technologies in Rare Diseases With a Focus on Lysosomal Storage Disorders: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Sudden Death of a Four-Day-Old Newborn Due to Mitochondrial Trifunctional Protein/Long-Chain 3-Hydroxyacyl-CoA Dehydrogenase Deficiencies and a Systematic Literature Review of Early Deaths of Neonates with Fatty Acid Oxidation Disorders.International journal of neonatal screening · 2025Review
- Continuity of Operations in Newborn Screening: Lessons Learned from Three Incidents.International journal of neonatal screening · 2024Article
- The newborn screening tests in Brazil: regional and socioeconomic prevalence and inequalities in 2013 and 2019.Jornal de pediatriaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic affected many essential aspects of public health, including newborn screening programs (NBS). Centers reported missing cases of inherited metabolic disease as a consequence of decreased diagnostic process quality during the pandemic. A number of problems emerged at the start of the pandemic, but from the beginning, solutions began to be proposed and implemented. Contingency plans were arranged, and these are reviewed and described in this article. Staff shortage emerged as an important issue, and as a result, new work schedules had to be implemented. The importance of personal protective equipment and social distancing also helped avoid disruption. Staff became stressed, and this needed to be addressed. The timeframe for collecting bloodspot samples was adapted in some cases, requiring reference ranges to be modified. A shortage of essential supplies and protective equipment was evident, and laboratories described sharing resources in some situations. The courier system had to be adapted to make timely and safe transport possible. Telemedicine became an essential tool to enable communication with patients, parents, and medical staff. Despite these difficulties, with adaptations and modifications, some centers evaluated candidate conditions, continued developments, or began new NBS. The pandemic can be regarded as a stress test of the NBS under real-world conditions, highlighting critical aspects of this multidisciplinary system and the need for establishing local, national, and global strategies to improve its robustness and reliability in times of shortage and overloaded national healthcare systems.
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.