ArticleNPJ genomic medicine2026
Semi-automated genomic newborn screening highlights complexities in reporting.
Article in NPJ genomic medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Perspectives on genomic newborn screening studies: design, implementation, and outcomes.Pediatric research · 2026Review
- Precision oncology in gynecologic cancers: molecular taxonomy, biomarker-guided therapeutics, and the challenge of therapeutic resistance.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
24 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Newborn screening programs are instrumental in the early detection of treatable conditions in the first days of life. By integrating genomic approaches, there is potential to expand the range of conditions included in these programs. As part of a research study, NewbornsInSA, we validated a genomic newborn screening workflow. Analysis of whole-genome sequencing data was restricted to a virtual panel of 613 genes, selected through engagement with local clinical teams. We assessed the workflow's performance using retrospective samples with known variant status. To reduce manual curation time, bioinformatics scripts were developed to auto-classify cases into those with no findings and those requiring manual review. We report on early findings from applying this workflow to a prospectively recruited cohort in which five reportable findings have been made to date. We discuss reporting challenges encountered in genes associated with multiple conditions, with incomplete penetrance, or variants associated with only mild phenotypes.
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.