Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38533444›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in neuroscience2024

Small size, big problems: insights and difficulties in prenatal diagnosis of fetal microcephaly.

Leila Haddad, Efrat Hadi, Zvi Leibovitz, Dorit Lev, Yoseph Shalev, Liat Gindes, Tally Lerman-Sagie

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. A Novel Fetal Intracranial Measurement Contributing to the Differential Diagnosis of Fetal Microcephaly.Journal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine · 2026
    Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Routine 36-week scan: diagnosis of fetal abnormalities.Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2025
    Article
  6. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Leila HaddadFetal Neurology Clinic, Wolfson Medical Center, Holon, Israel.
Efrat HadiFetal Neurology Clinic, Wolfson Medical Center, Holon, Israel.
Zvi LeibovitzObstetrics & Gynecology Ultrasound Unit, Bnai Zion Medical Center, Haifa, Israel.
Dorit LevFetal Neurology Clinic, Wolfson Medical Center, Holon, Israel.
Yoseph ShalevObstetrics & Gynecology Ultrasound Unit, Wolfson Medical Center, Holon, Israel.
Liat GindesFetal Neurology Clinic, Wolfson Medical Center, Holon, Israel.
Tally Lerman-SagieFetal Neurology Clinic, Wolfson Medical Center, Holon, Israel.
Tel Aviv University · ILWolfson Medical Center · ILBnai Zion Medical Center · IL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Microcephaly is a sign, not a diagnosis. Its incidence varies widely due to the differences in the definition and the population being studied. It is strongly related to neurodevelopmental disorders. Differences in definitions and measurement techniques between fetuses and newborns pose a great challenge for the diagnosis and prognostication of fetal microcephaly. A false positive diagnosis can result (in countries where it is legal) in erroneous termination of pregnancy, where a false negative diagnosis might lead to the birth of a microcephalic newborn. Microcephaly in growth restricted fetuses deserves special attention and separate evaluation as it is an important prognostic factor, and not necessarily part of the general growth retardation. Several genetic syndromes incorporating microcephaly and intrauterine growth retardation (IUGR) are discussed. Deceleration of the head circumference (HC) growth rate even when the HC is still within normal limits might be the only clue for developing microcephaly and should be considered during fetal head growth follow up. Combining additional parameters such as a positive family history, associated anomalies, and new measurement parameters can improve prediction in about 50% of cases, and thus should be part of the prenatal workup. Advances in imaging modalities and in prenatal genetic investigation along with the emergence of new growth charts can also improve diagnostic accuracy. In this article, we review the different definitions and etiologies of fetal microcephaly, discuss difficulties in diagnosis, investigate the reasons for the low yield of prenatal diagnosis, and provide improvement suggestions. Finally, we suggest an updated algorithm that will aid in the diagnosis and management of fetal microcephaly.

Indexed as

diagnosisfetalmicrocephalyneurosonography of fetusultrasound

Identifiers

PMID38533444
PMCPMC10964924
OpenAlexW4392702427

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.