ArticleInternational journal of neonatal screening2026
Advances and Gaps in Global Newborn Screening for Sickle Cell Disease.
Article in International journal of neonatal screening, 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A qualitative evidence synthesis on perinatal screening for sickle cell disease in high-burden countries.BMC global and public health · 2026Pooled it
- Implementation of a Prospective Birth Cohort for Newborn Screening and Early Linkage to Comprehensive Sickle Cell Disease Care in a Low-Resource Setting.International journal of neonatal screening · 2026Article
- Newborn Screening for Hemoglobinopathies and Thalassemias: Brief History, Recent Activities, and Global Status-2026.International journal of neonatal screening · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Newborn screening (NBS) for sickle cell disease (SCD) has been performed in the United States (US) for decades, significantly reducing infant morbidity and mortality. A landmark clinical trial demonstrated that early identification of SCD enabled timely and life-saving prophylactic penicillin; this led to recommendations for universal NBS across the US. Early use of hydroxyurea as a safe and effective treatment for SCD further improved clinical outcomes by preventing acute and chronic disease complications. These advances add to the importance of early diagnosis through NBS, providing an opportunity for early treatment intervention. In recent years, high-resource countries-including those in Europe, the UK, and Canada-have adopted NBS for SCD using diverse strategies. Simultaneously, pilot programs in lower-resource settings such as Africa, Brazil, and India have demonstrated local feasibility and impact through implementation efforts. An overarching equity gap for achieving global NBS for SCD is the variable access to simple, accurate, and affordable testing. Other challenges include timing of NBS testing, targeted populations, laboratory methods, and parental education with genetic counseling. Questions remain about the equitable enrollment of affected infants worldwide into comprehensive care to ensure early treatment. These challenges raise concerns about sustainability, underscore the need for long-term funding and a strategic plan, and highlight persistent inequities from the lack of global NBS standards.
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.