Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41617637›Full record

SynthesisPrenatal diagnosis2026

A Framework for Bioinformatic Reporting in Prenatal Sequencing: Insights From a Systematic Review.

Ashley J Pritchard, Karen Mei Xian Lim, Graeme Smith, Elizabeth Scotchman, Alexander Gibbs, Patrick Lombard, Natalie J Chandler

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Prenatal diagnosis, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

7 authors.

Ashley J PritchardNHS North Thames Genomic Laboratory Hub, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.ORCID 0009-0002-0484-3892
Karen Mei Xian LimDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, National University Hospital, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-8524-2177
Graeme SmithNHS North Thames Genomic Laboratory Hub, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Elizabeth ScotchmanNHS North Thames Genomic Laboratory Hub, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7418-6037
Alexander GibbsNHS North Thames Genomic Laboratory Hub, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Patrick LombardNHS North Thames Genomic Laboratory Hub, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Natalie J ChandlerNHS North Thames Genomic Laboratory Hub, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.

Funding

Ministry of Health SingaporeNIHR Biomedical Research Center at Great Ormond Street HospitalNorth Thames Genomic Medicine Service Alliance
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genomic sequencing has become a key tool in the investigation of foetal anomalies, with a growing shift from targeted panels to exome and genome sequencing. These broader approaches generate significantly more data, underscoring the need for robust bioinformatics pipelines. However, practices vary widely between laboratories. This systematic review explores current differences in bioinformatics workflows, the transparency of reporting, and the clinical impact of these variations. Using a search strategy from a previous review of prenatal sequencing studies (2018-2022), we identified 89 new records. Combined with 65 from the earlier review, a total of 154 articles were included. Data extraction focused on bioinformatics pipeline details across all analytical stages, with attention to clinical relevance. We found that reporting of bioinformatics methods was frequently incomplete. Tool names and versions were often omitted, quality control steps were poorly described, and filtering strategies lacked reproducibility. These deficiencies in reporting hinder readers from fully interpreting the sequencing results and understanding the potential limitations. To address this, we propose a checklist of essential bioinformatics metrics to improve reporting standards and support reproducible, clinically meaningful analyses.

Indexed as

Computational BiologyPrenatal DiagnosisSequence Analysis, DNAFemaleHumansPregnancy

Identifiers

PMID41617637
PMCPMC13170062

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.