Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37815612›Full record

ReviewBundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz2023

[Evaluation and optimization of newborn screening by structured long-term follow-up-using the example of inherited metabolic diseases].

Ulrike Mütze, Stefan Kölker

Open access · hybridAbstract readEnglish AbstractReview
In one paragraph

Review in Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ulrike MützeSektion Neuropädiatrie und Stoffwechselmedizin, Zentrum für Kinder- und Jugendmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 430, 69120, Heidelberg, Deutschland. ulrike.muetze@med.uni-heidelberg.de.
Stefan KölkerSektion Neuropädiatrie und Stoffwechselmedizin, Zentrum für Kinder- und Jugendmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 430, 69120, Heidelberg, Deutschland.
Heidelberg University · DEUniversity Hospital Heidelberg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Newborn screening (NBS) is a highly successful secondary prevention program with the goal of preventing severe sequelae of congenital, mostly genetic, diseases by identifying them as early as possible, ideally in the pre-symptomatic period. Studies to date have shown the important achievements of NBS programs but also reveal a number of relevant weaknesses. These include the often incompletely understood natural history and phenotypic diversity of rare diseases as well as the inadequate ability to accurately predict individual disease severity at an early stage and thus the uncertainties in case definition, risk stratification, and treatment indication.In light of the rapid developments in high-throughput genetic technologies and the associated opportunities for substantial future expansion of NBS programs, it seems overdue to make structured long-term follow-up and the subsequent evaluation of the long-term health benefits mandatory for individuals with rare diseases identified through NBS. This article explains the importance of long-term follow-up for the evaluation and continuous optimization of the screening. Long-term clinical outcomes of people with inherited metabolic diseases identified by NBS are presented as examples.

Indexed as

Metabolic DiseasesNeonatal ScreeningFollow-Up StudiesGermanyHumansInfant, NewbornRare DiseasesLong-term outcomeNeonatal screeningObservational studiesRegistrySecondary prevention

Identifiers

PMID37815612
PMCPMC10622349
OpenAlexW4387472799

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.