ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
Cost-effectiveness of different screening strategies for Down syndrome: a real-world analysis in 140,472 women.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Recent advancements in high-throughput sequencing have validated the accuracy, safety, and effectiveness of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for Down syndrome (DS). Methods: This study aims to assess the effectiveness and economic implications of NIPT versus second-trimester serum screening (STSS) for DS and the different screening strategies through retrospectively analyzing data from 140,472 pregnant women who completed both NIPT and STSS (provided for free by local public welfare programs) between March 1, 2018 and December 31, 2020. Data were categorized into eight groups based on different screening strategies. Results: The sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value of NIPT for detecting trisomy 21 were significantly higher compared with those of STSS. The universal NIPT screening strategy demonstrated the best effectiveness, detecting 163 DS cases with the highest net benefit and a cost-effectiveness ratio of 1:9.53. The STSS and NIPT combined screening strategy detected 128 DS cases with the lowest cost-effectiveness at RMB 341,800. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of the universal NIPT screening strategy was RMB 1,186,200, significantly lower than the socioeconomic burden associated with a DS case. Conclusion: NIPT demonstrated significantly superior testing performance compared to STSS. At a unit cost of RMB 600, the universal NIPT screening strategy is the most effective and holds substantial health economic value.
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.