Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37114008›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in pediatrics2023

Maternal and fetal factors influencing fetal fraction: A retrospective analysis of 153,306 pregnant women undergoing noninvasive prenatal screening.

Cechuan Deng, Jianlong Liu, Sha Liu, Hongqian Liu, Ting Bai, Xiaosha Jing, Tianyu Xia, Yunyun Liu, Jing Cheng, Xiang Wei and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in pediatrics, 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. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  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

15 authors.

Cechuan DengPrenatal Diagnostic Center, Department of Medical Genetics, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Jianlong LiuPrenatal Diagnostic Center, Department of Medical Genetics, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Sha LiuPrenatal Diagnostic Center, Department of Medical Genetics, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Hongqian LiuPrenatal Diagnostic Center, Department of Medical Genetics, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Ting BaiPrenatal Diagnostic Center, Department of Medical Genetics, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Xiaosha JingPrenatal Diagnostic Center, Department of Medical Genetics, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Tianyu XiaPrenatal Diagnostic Center, Department of Medical Genetics, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Yunyun LiuPrenatal Diagnostic Center, Department of Medical Genetics, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Jing ChengPrenatal Diagnostic Center, Department of Medical Genetics, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Xiang WeiPrenatal Diagnostic Center, Department of Medical Genetics, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Lingling XingPrenatal Diagnostic Center, Department of Medical Genetics, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Yuan LuoPrenatal Diagnostic Center, Department of Medical Genetics, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Quanfang ZhouPrenatal Diagnostic Center, Department of Medical Genetics, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Qian ZhuPrenatal Diagnostic Center, Department of Medical Genetics, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Shanling LiuPrenatal Diagnostic Center, Department of Medical Genetics, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Genetic factors are important causes of birth defects. Noninvasive prenatal screening (NIPS) is widely used for prenatal screening of trisomy 21, trisomy 18, and trisomy 13, which are the three most common fetal aneuploidies. Fetal fraction refers to the proportion of cell-free fetal DNA in maternal plasma, which can influence the accuracy of NIPS. Elucidating the factors that influence fetal fraction can provide guidance for the interpretation of NIPS results and genetic counseling. However, there is currently no broad consensus on the known factors that influence fetal fraction. Objective: The study aimed to explore the maternal and fetal factors influencing fetal fraction. Methods: A total of 153,306 singleton pregnant women who underwent NIPS were included. Data on gestational age; maternal age; body mass index (BMI); z-scores for chromosomes 21, 18, and 13; and fetal fraction in NIPS were collected from the study population, and the relationships between fetal fraction and these factors were examined. The relationship between fetal fraction and different fetal trisomy types was also analyzed. Results: The results showed that the median gestational age, maternal age, and BMI of the pregnant women were 18 (16, 20) weeks, 29 (25, 32) years, and 22.19 (20.40, 24.24) kg/m Conclusions: The factors that influence fetal fraction need to be taken into consideration before NIPS for quality control and after NIPS for result interpretation.

Indexed as

aneuploidycell-free DNAfetal fractiongenetic counselingnoninvasive prenatal screening

Identifiers

PMID37114008
PMCPMC10126334

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.