ArticleScientific reports2024
Analysis of deafness susceptibility gene of neonates in northern Guangdong, China.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 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
- Engineered Inner Ear Drug Delivery Systems for Hearing Loss Treatment.Research (Washington, D.C.) · 2026Review
- Challenges in evaluating whole genome sequencing for newborn screening: series of systematic reviews and roadmap for evidence generation for policy advisers.BMJ medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
This study aimed to explore the molecular epidemiology characteristics of deafness susceptibility genes in neonates in northern Guangdong and provide a scientific basis for deafness prevention and control. A total of 10,183 neonates were recruited between January 2018 and December 2022 at Yuebei People's Hospital. Among these, a PCR hybridization screening group of 8276 neonates was tested for four deafness genes: GJB2, SLC26A4, mtDNA, and GJB3 by PCR hybridization. Another group used next-generation sequencing (NGS) to detect genetic susceptibility genes in 1907 neonates. In PCR hybridization screening group, 346 (4.18%) of 8276 neonates were found to be carriers of the deafness gene. Among these, 182 (2.2%) had GJB2 variants, 114 (1.38%) had SLC26A4 variants, 35 (0.42%) had mtDNA variants, and 15 (0.18%) had GJB3 variants. In NGS Screening Group, 195 out of 1907 neonates were found to be carriers of the deafness gene, with a positive rate of 10.22%. Among these, 137 (7.18%) had GJB2 variants, 41 (2.15%) had SLC26A4 variants, 11 (0.58%) had mtDNA variants, and 6 (0.31%) had GJB3 variants. The prevalence of deafness gene variants was high in Northern Guangdong Province. The most common gene for deafness was GJB2, followed by SLC26A4 and mtDNA. GJB3 variants are rare. Compared with PCR hybridization method, NGS technology can expand the screening scope and greatly improve the detection rate of deafness genes. The c.109G>A of GJB2 was found to occur at a high frequency, which should be considered. Therefore, it is important to conduct neonatal deafness gene screening to prevent and control hereditary deafness.
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.