ArticleAJOG global reports2025
Effectiveness of expanded prenatal screening among consanguineous couples of Afghan descent.
Article in AJOG global reports, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The American College of Medical Genetics recommends extensive carrier screening among consanguineous couples, yet limited information is available regarding its performance among specific populations. We describe the potential utility of a large expanded carrier screening panel (>500 genes) for Afghan couples with consanguinity. Method: A retrospective chart review was conducted of all patients who reported consanguinity and had genetic counseling consultation between 2010 and 2021 at our institution. Results: Thirty-six women of Afghan descent reported consanguinity. Nineteen (53%) did not have known autosomal recessive disease risk (no prior fetus/child with suspected syndrome), 11 (31%) had apparent disease risk (fetus/child with symptoms suggesting syndrome but no specific diagnosis), and six (17%) had known molecular diagnosis for a prior child with a recessive syndrome. Of the six women with known molecular diagnosis for prior child with syndrome, five had known pathogenic variants confirming a genetic disorder, and one had highly suspicious variant of uncertain significance in the family. Among these six, five (83%) could have been identified with a 787-gene prenatal carrier screening panel. Conclusion: Large, expanded carrier screening panel appears to be an effective method for identifying disorders among consanguineous Afghan couples and should ideally be considered preconceptionally.
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.