ArticleJAMA network open2023
At-Risk Genomic Findings for Pediatric-Onset Disorders From Genome Sequencing vs Medically Actionable Gene Panel in Proactive Screening of Newborns and Children.
Article in JAMA network open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating whole genome sequencing for rare diseases in newborn screening: evidence synthesis from a series of systematic reviews.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2025Pooled it
- Healthcare professionals' views on expanding newborn screening with or without genomics in France: Results of the SeDeN-p2 study.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- Unexpected genotypes associated with severe paediatric conditions identified in a healthy population cohort.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Observational
- Semi-automated genomic newborn screening highlights complexities in reporting.NPJ genomic medicine · 2026Article
- Correcting PVS1 overestimation: clinical insights into rescue transcripts and variant reclassification in 4 prenatal cases.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Genomics in Health and Biomedicine.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2026Review
- Article
- Assessment of the variant prioritization strategy for genomic newborn screening in the Generation Study.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2025Article
- Towards IBD Prediction and Prevention: The Contribution of Genetics and Genomics.Inflammatory bowel diseases · 2025Review
- A Genomic Sequencing Approach to Newborn Mass Screening and Its Opportunities.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Data-driven consideration of genetic disorders for global genomic newborn screening programs.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2025Article
- Universal newborn screening using genome sequencing: early experience from the GUARDIAN study.Pediatric research · 2025Review
- Challenges in evaluating whole genome sequencing for newborn screening: series of systematic reviews and roadmap for evidence generation for policy advisers.BMJ medicine · 2025Article
- Beyond Single Diagnosis: Exploring Multidiagnostic Realities in Pediatric Patients through Genome Sequencing.Human mutation · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Although the clinical utility of genome sequencing for critically ill children is well recognized, its utility for proactive pediatric screening is not well explored. Objective: To evaluate molecular findings from screening ostensibly healthy children with genome sequencing compared with a gene panel for medically actionable pediatric conditions. Design, Setting, and Participants: This case series study was conducted among consecutive, apparently healthy children undergoing proactive genetic screening for pediatric disorders by genome sequencing (n = 562) or an exome-based panel of 268 genes (n = 606) from March 1, 2018, through July 31, 2022. Exposures: Genetic screening for pediatric-onset disorders using genome sequencing or an exome-based panel of 268 genes. Main Outcomes and Measures: Molecular findings indicative of genetic disease risk. Results: Of 562 apparently healthy children (286 girls [50.9%]; median age, 29 days [IQR, 9-117 days]) undergoing screening by genome sequencing, 46 (8.2%; 95% CI, 5.9%-10.5%) were found to be at risk for pediatric-onset disease, including 22 children (3.9%) at risk for high-penetrance disorders. Sequence analysis uncovered molecular diagnoses among 32 individuals (5.7%), while copy number variant analysis uncovered molecular diagnoses among 14 individuals (2.5%), including 4 individuals (0.7%) with chromosome scale abnormalities. Overall, there were 47 molecular diagnoses, with 1 individual receiving 2 diagnoses; of the 47 potential diagnoses, 22 (46.8%) were associated with high-penetrance conditions. Pathogenic variants in medically actionable pediatric genes were found in 6 individuals (1.1%), constituting 12.8% (6 of 47) of all diagnoses. At least 1 pharmacogenomic variant was reported for 89.0% (500 of 562) of the cohort. In contrast, of 606 children (293 girls [48.3%]; median age, 26 days [IQR, 10-67 days]) undergoing gene panel screening, only 13 (2.1%; 95% CI, 1.0%-3.3%) resulted in potential childhood-onset diagnoses, a significantly lower rate than those screened by genome sequencing (P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this case series study, genome sequencing as a proactive screening approach for children, due to its unrestrictive gene content and technical advantages in comparison with an exome-based gene panel for medically actionable childhood conditions, uncovered a wide range of heterogeneous high-penetrance pediatric conditions that could guide early interventions and medical management.
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.