Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39701661›Full record

ReviewThe Lancet. Child & adolescent health2025

Universal newborn screening for congenital cytomegalovirus infection.

Mark R Schleiss, Daniel Blázquez-Gamero

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Lancet. Child & adolescent health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Evaluation of reflexive, hearing-targeted congenital cytomegalovirus screening at a high-volume center.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
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.

Mark R SchleissDepartment of Pediatrics, Division of Pediatric Infectious Diseases, Medical School, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA. Electronic address: schleiss@umn.edu.
Daniel Blázquez-GameroPediatric Infectious Diseases Unit, Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, Instituto de Investigación Hospital 12 de Octubre, Translational Research Network in Pediatric Infectious Diseases, Universidad Complutense, Madrid, Spain.

Funding

Optimizing Immunity and Maternal Host Defense Against Congenital Cytomegalovirus InfectionR01HD098866 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI Craig John Bierle, Michael A McVoy · 2019 to 2026
$3.9M
NCBDD CDC HHS U19 DD001218NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD098866
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Congenital cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is the leading infectious cause of childhood disability, in particular sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL). Timeliness of diagnosis is crucial, since the presence of CMV in any compartment (eg, blood, urine, or saliva) after age 21 days can mean postnatal acquisition of infection, particularly in breastfed infants. Given these issues, there is considerable interest in implementation of screening programmes-either universal screening (where all newborns are tested) or targeted screening. Targeted screening is typically based on the outcome of a newborn hearing screen, and can be influenced in some strategies by findings of other signs suggestive of congenital CMV. Universal screening is likely to have the greatest overall benefit. Early identification of congenital CMV allows for interventions such as antiviral therapy (when indicated) and enables anticipatory audiological monitoring that facilitates timely detection of delayed-onset SNHL. However, there are debates about the effectiveness of screening programmes. Most infants with congenital CMV are unaffected and do not appear to be at risk for adverse neurodevelopment outcomes, except for SNHL. Screening can, therefore, raise unwarranted concern among parents and clinicians in these cases. The best clinical sample for diagnostic testing is unclear. PCR testing of saliva is sensitive but has a risk of yielding false-positive results in infants without congenital CMV. Resolving the technological issues has improved the sensitivity of dried blood spot (DBS) PCR but the technique remains suboptimum. An advantage to DBS PCR testing is that an infrastructure exists to add this test to existing newborn screening programmes. In this Review, the advantages and disadvantages of congenital CMV screening are discussed, along with high-priority areas for future research that will inform and direct this rapidly evolving field.

Indexed as

Cytomegalovirus InfectionsNeonatal ScreeningCytomegalovirusHearing Loss, SensorineuralHumansInfant, NewbornSaliva

Identifiers

PMID39701661
PMCPMC13676156

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.