ReviewLancet regional health. Americas2023
Newborn sequencing is only part of the solution for better child health.
Review in Lancet regional health. Americas, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mucopolysaccharidosis Type II Screening, Diagnosis, and Management: A Literature Review and Practical Recommendations for Newborn Screening Programs and Health Care Providers to Support Families and Improve Outcomes.International journal of neonatal screening · 2026Review
- Integrating the Genomic Revolution into Newborn Screening: Current Challenges and Future Perspectives.Pediatric reports · 2026Review
- Three ethical approaches to expanding newborn screening through genomics: a critical comparative analysis.BMC medical ethics · 2025Article
- The Role of Genetic Testing in Palliative Care Decisions for Critically Ill Newborns.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Charting the Ethical Frontier in Newborn Screening Research: Insights from the NBSTRN ELSI Researcher Needs Survey.International journal of neonatal screening · 2024Article
- Current Status of Newborn Bloodspot Screening Worldwide 2024: A Comprehensive Review of Recent Activities (2020-2023).International journal of neonatal screening · 2024Review
- A Children's Rights Framework for Genomic Medicine: Newborn Screening as a Use Case.Medical research archives · 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
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Newborn screening (NBS) aims to detect newborns with severe congenital diseases before the onset of clinical manifestations. Advancements in genomic technologies have led to proposals for the development of genomic-based NBS (G-NBS) in concert with traditional NBS. Proponents of G-NBS highlight how G-NBS could expand the number of diseases screened at birth to thousands and spur the development of new drugs and treatments for rare diseases. Balancing the excitement, some experts have pointed to the ethical dilemmas linked to G-NBS. The dialog, however, has yet to engage with sufficient urgency on how the new G-NBS might chart a course for improving the health of all children. Our analysis of more than 130 million births in the United States between 1959 and 1995 shows that traditional NBS led to improvements in infant mortality and health equity only when it was implemented in association with measures to improve healthcare access for children. We suggest that the new G-NBS will lead to better child health only when the same degree of attention devoted to genomic technologies will be directed to the promotion of public health measures that facilitate access to high-quality healthcare for all children.
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.