Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41087733›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2025

"Jumping too far ahead": Australian healthcare professional, scientist, and policy maker perspectives on using genomics in newborn screening.

Joanne Scarfe, Alexis Turner, Christian Meagher, Michelle A Farrar, Kaustuv Bhattacharya, Sarah-Grace Paguinto, Nicole Millis, Jo Watson, Didu S Kariyawasam, Sarah Norris

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Joanne ScarfeThe University of Sydney, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney School of Public Health, The Leeder Centre for Health Policy, Economics and Data, Sydney, NSW, Australia. joanne.scarfe@sydney.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3773-4537
Alexis TurnerThe University of Sydney, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney School of Public Health, The Leeder Centre for Health Policy, Economics and Data, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Christian MeagherDiscipline of Paediatrics and Child Health, School of Clinical Medicine, UNSW Medicine and Health, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Michelle A FarrarDiscipline of Paediatrics and Child Health, School of Clinical Medicine, UNSW Medicine and Health, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Kaustuv BhattacharyaGenetic Metabolic Disorders Service, Sydney Children's Hospital Network, Randwick and Westmead, Westmead, NSW, Australia.
Sarah-Grace PaguintoDiscipline of Paediatrics and Child Health, School of Clinical Medicine, UNSW Medicine and Health, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Nicole MillisRare Voices Australia, Mentone, VIC, Australia.
Jo WatsonDepartment of Health and Aged Care, HTA Consumer Consultative Committee, Canberra, ACT, Australia.
Didu S KariyawasamDiscipline of Paediatrics and Child Health, School of Clinical Medicine, UNSW Medicine and Health, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4176-4010
Sarah NorrisThe University of Sydney, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney School of Public Health, The Leeder Centre for Health Policy, Economics and Data, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4733-6906

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The future use of genomics in Australia's newborn bloodspot screening (NBS) program is likely to be associated with both positive and negative impacts. Before adopting this technology, it is important to understand the views of all stakeholders, including scientists, health care professionals (HCPs) and policy-makers involved in delivering the program. Semi-structured interviews or small group discussions were undertaken with 19 HCPs or scientists, and 16 policy-makers. Responses were analyzed using inductive content analysis. Participants acknowledged the potential of genomics in NBS to improve early detection, diagnosis, and treatment. However, they more often highlighted potential risks of genomics in NBS, and the broader technical and implementation challenges to the health system. Perspectives varied on whether genomic NBS should align with Australia's current NBS paradigm, focusing on severe, treatable, early-onset conditions, or whether wider potential uses of genomic NBS data (such as later clinical uses) should drive a 'paradigm shift' in policy that values benefits beyond newborn screening. Respondents reported that effective implementation of genomic NBS will require adequate health system readiness, which will require national program coordination, adequate consent, an agreed ethical approach to reporting uncertain or non-actionable results, enhanced workforce capacity, enhanced laboratory and data infrastructure, equitable access to downstream health services, and ethically and legally agreed uses of the genomic data. Findings offer insights for Australia and other countries considering the use of genomics in NBS programs.

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.