ReviewLife (Basel, Switzerland)2025
A Review of Artificial Intelligence-Based Down Syndrome Detection Techniques.
Review in Life (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. 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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Temporal Analysis of Embryonic Epidermal Morphogenesis inInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Deep Learning-Powered Down Syndrome Detection Using Facial Images.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Correction: Shaikh et al. A Review of Artificial Intelligence-Based Down Syndrome Detection Techniques.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDown syndrome (DS) is one of the most prevalent chromosomal abnormalities affecting global healthcare. Recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) have enhanced DS diagnostic accuracy. However, there is a lack of thorough evaluations analyzing the overall impact and effectiveness of AI-based DS diagnostic approaches.
objectivesThis review intends to identify methodologies and technologies used in AI-driven DS diagnostics. It evaluates the performance of AI models in terms of standard evaluation metrics, highlighting their strengths and limitations. METHODOLOGY: In order to ensure transparency and rigor, the authors followed the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. They extracted 1175 articles from major academic databases. By leveraging inclusion and exclusion criteria, a final set of 25 articles was selected. OUTCOMES: The findings revealed significant advancements in AI-powered DS diagnostics across diverse data modalities. The modalities, including facial images, ultrasound scans, and genetic data, demonstrated strong potential for early DS diagnosis. Despite these advancements, this review outlined the limitations of AI approaches. Small and imbalanced datasets reduce the generalizability of the AI models. The authors present actionable strategies to enhance the clinical adoptions of these models.
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.