ReviewBundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz2023
[Genomic newborn screening-research approaches, challenges, and opportunities].
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 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Parental reactions to and preferences for genomic newborn screening in Germany: findings from a scenario-based survey experiment.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- A population-representative survey on attitudes toward genomic newborn screening in Germany.Genetics in medicine open · 2026Article
- Article
- Prequalification of genome-based newborn screening for severe childhood genetic diseases through federated training based on purifying hyperselection.American journal of human genetics · 2024Article
- Genome-based newborn screening for severe childhood genetic diseases has high positive predictive value and sensitivity in a NICU pilot trial.American journal of human genetics · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The application of high-throughput sequencing methods for population-based genomic newborn screening offers numerous opportunities for improving population health. The use of genome-based sequencing technology holds potential to enable the diagnosis of virtually any genetic disorder at an early stage and offers great flexibility when it comes to selection and expansion of target diseases. National and international efforts are therefore being made to investigate the ethical, legal, social, psychological, and technical aspects of genomic newborn screening. In addition to the many opportunities, there are numerous challenges and questions that remain to be answered: When and how should legal guardians be informed about such screening? Which diseases should be screened for? How should incidental findings or identification of a genetic predisposition be dealt with? Should data be stored long term and if so, how can this be done securely? Provided there is an appropriate regulatory framework and a transparent consent process, genomic newborn screening has the potential to fundamentally change the way in which we screen for congenital diseases. However, there is still much to be done. To achieve understanding and acceptance of genomic newborn screening amongst all stakeholders and thus to maximize its benefits for the population, a public discourse on the possibilities and limitations of genomic newborn screening is of critical importance. This article aims to provide an overview of the innovative technical developments in the field of human genetics, describe national and international approaches, and discuss challenges and opportunities of genomic newborn screening development.
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.