ArticlePrenatal diagnosis2026
Sex Ratios at Birth Following Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing in Victoria, Australia.
Article in Prenatal diagnosis, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveNon-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) can determine fetal chromosomal sex early in pregnancy, raising the possibility of sex selection. However, current evidence regarding this practice is limited. Our objective was to assess the sex ratio at birth (SRB) among a cohort of infants born following NIPT from a single laboratory provider in Victoria, Australia (2014-2018).
methodThe NIPT dataset was linked with Victorian birth records. SRB and estimated relative risk of the birth of a male infant based on maternal major region of birth, parity and maternal age were calculated. An SRB was considered outside the natural range if the point estimate and 95% confidence interval were outside 1.04-1.06.
resultsThe final dataset for analysis contained n = 43,665 NIPT records. The majority (88.5%, n = 38,631) were linked with a birth record. The overall SRB was within the natural range (1.05, 95% CI 1.029-1.071). Confidence intervals for all maternal major regions of birth, parities, and maternal age categories overlapped with the natural range. There was an increased estimated relative risk of a male birth for mothers born in Southern and Central Asia compared with mothers born in Australia (RR: 1.049, 95% CI 1.005-1.096, p = 0.03).
conclusionWe did not find evidence of an overall skewed SRB among a cohort of Australian NIPT users. However, our findings warrant larger studies on NIPT use and possible sex selection practices.
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.