ArticleVox sanguinis2025
Noninvasive fetal antigen genotyping: Results from a survey on the status of clinical implementation.
Article in Vox sanguinis, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Noninvasive fetal antigen genotyping: Results from a survey on the status of clinical implementation.Vox sanguinis · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesNoninvasive fetal antigen genotyping can assist the management of immunized pregnant women, and fetal RHD genotyping can be used as a screening assay to guide restricted use of Rh prophylaxis. Based on a survey, we present an overview of the implementation of noninvasive fetal antigen genotyping into clinical practice. MATERIALS AND
methodsA survey was developed and sent out to the members of the International Society of Blood Transfusion (ISBT) working party on Red Cell Immunogenetics and Blood Group Terminology and to participants of the international noninvasive fetal RHD genotyping programme from the Danish Institute for External Quality Assurance for Laboratories in the health sector (DEKS). The survey contained four sections: fetal RHD screening, fetal RHD genotyping for RhD immunized women, fetal genotyping of other antigen targets than RhD and a section for collecting topics for future collaboration. The survey data were evaluated by the core author group.
resultsFifty-two survey responders were from 22 countries. Fetal RHD screening was implemented by 73%, foremost using real-time PCR with in-house assays, primarily, or commercially available kits. Most laboratories use the same assay for RhD immunized women. Thirty-eight percent of the responders test for other antigen targets than RhD, using either real-time PCR, droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) or DNA sequencing. There was an interest in collaborations on topics across methodology, technology, strategy and health care regulations.
conclusionIn general, we found that noninvasive fetal blood group antigen genotyping is well implemented. However, our results are biased towards high-income countries, Europe and laboratories already running noninvasive fetal antigen genotyping.
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.