ArticleInternational journal of neonatal screening2024
Evaluation of Neonatal Screening Programs for Tyrosinemia Type 1 Worldwide.
Article in International journal of neonatal screening, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- Transitioning from Laboratory-Developed Tests to a Single Commercial Reagent Kit in a National Newborn Screening Program: Impact on Analytical Performance and Harmonization.International journal of neonatal screening · 2026Article
- Article
- Overview of European Practices for Management of Tyrosinemia Type 1: Towards European Guidelines.Journal of inherited metabolic disease · 2025Review
- Correction: Kuypers et al. Evaluation of Neonatal Screening Programs for Tyrosinemia Type 1 Worldwide.International journal of neonatal screening · 2025Article
- Evaluation of the Performance of Newborn Screening for Tyrosinemia Type 1 in The Netherlands: Suggestions for Improvements Using Additional Biomarkers in Addition to Succinylacetone.International journal of neonatal screening · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In The Netherlands, newborn screening (NBS) for tyrosinemia type 1 (TT1) uses dried blood spot (DBS) succinylacetone (SUAC) as a biomarker. However, high false-positive (FP) rates and a false-negative (FN) case show that the Dutch TT1 NBS protocol is suboptimal. In search of optimization options, we evaluated the protocols used by other NBS programs and their performance. We distributed an online survey to NBS program representatives worldwide (
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.