Self-learning neural network as a prediction model in non-invasive prenatal testing to detect fetal SNVs.

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.

1. Is It Feasible to Screen for Fetal De Novo or Paternally Inherited Pathogenic Single Nucleotide Variants in Maternal Plasma Cell-Free DNA? A Systematic Literature Review.Prenatal diagnosis · 2025
   Pooled it
2. Technological Advances in Molecular Diagnostic Methods for Hereditary Diseases in Preconception and Prenatal Settings.Current issues in molecular biology · 2026
   Review
3. Performance of expanded non-invasive prenatal testing for fetal aneuploidies and copy-number variations in 9,708 pregnancies.Molecular cytogenetics · 2026
   Article

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Funding

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as