Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41764288›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2026

A multi-dimensional framework for establishing and managing a genomic newborn screening program.

Elena Schnabel-Besson, Nicola Dikow, Karla Alex, Ulrike Mütze, Hannah Straub, Elena Sophia Doll, Julia Mahal, Heiko Brennenstuhl, Carlotta Julia Mayer, Lars Neth and 8 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2026. 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

18 authors.

Elena Schnabel-Besson *Heidelberg University, Medical Faculty of Heidelberg, Center for Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, Department of Pediatrics I, Division of Pediatric Neurology and Metabolic Medicine, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0008-4342-1805
Nicola Dikow *Heidelberg University, Institute of Human Genetics, Heidelberg, Germany.
Karla Alex *Heidelberg University, Faculty of Medicine, Institute for Medical and Data Ethics, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7065-9201
Ulrike MützeHeidelberg University, Medical Faculty of Heidelberg, Center for Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, Department of Pediatrics I, Division of Pediatric Neurology and Metabolic Medicine, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4251-7257
Hannah StraubUniversity of Mannheim, Faculty of Law, Public Law, Law of Economic Regulation and Media, Mannheim, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0007-8394-6801
Elena Sophia DollHeidelberg University, Institute of Medical Psychology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
Julia MahalHeidelberg University, Institute of Medical Psychology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
Heiko BrennenstuhlHeidelberg University, Institute of Human Genetics, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6909-0003
Carlotta Julia MayerHeidelberg University, Institute of Medical Psychology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
Lars NethHeidelberg University, Faculty of Medicine, Institute for Medical and Data Ethics, Heidelberg, Germany.
Tobias HagedornDeutsche Interessengemeinschaft Phenylketonurie und verwandte angeborene Stoffwechselstörungen e.V, Heidelberg, Germany.
Henriette HöglKindernetzwerk e.V, Aschaffenburg, Germany.
Sascha SettegastMartin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Department of Philosophy, Halle (Saale), Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6530-2809
Beate DitzenHeidelberg University, Institute of Medical Psychology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
Ralf Müller-TerpitzUniversity of Mannheim, Faculty of Law, Public Law, Law of Economic Regulation and Media, Mannheim, Germany.
Stefan KölkerHeidelberg University, Medical Faculty of Heidelberg, Center for Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, Department of Pediatrics I, Division of Pediatric Neurology and Metabolic Medicine, Heidelberg, Germany.
Christian P SchaafHeidelberg University, Institute of Human Genetics, Heidelberg, Germany.
Eva WinklerHeidelberg University, Faculty of Medicine, Institute for Medical and Data Ethics, Heidelberg, Germany. eva.winkler@med.uni-heidelberg.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7460-0154

Funding

Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (Federal Ministry of Education and Research) 01GP2201ABundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (Federal Ministry of Education and Research) 01GP2201B
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Newborn screening (NBS) is an effective measure of secondary prevention. The application of genomic sequencing in population-based screening would enable further expansions of the NBS disease panel and a genomic NBS (gNBS). The selection of NBS target diseases is still based on the Wilson and Jungner screening principles from 1968, which are considered incomplete, particularly for an extension towards gNBS. The present work aims to establish a multi-dimensional framework for future gNBS programs. An interdisciplinary expert panel comprising researchers from pediatric and adolescent medicine, human genetics, ethics, medical psychology, law, and patient representatives used a nominal group technique-like multi-stage consensus process to define criteria for gNBS, considering ethical, legal, and social implications, medical aspects, and patient perspectives. Overall, 18 criteria were developed, clustered into four subcategories: I. Clinical criteria (characteristics of the target disease); II. Diagnostic criteria (requirements of the test); III. Therapeutic-interventional criteria (prerequisites of the intervention); IV. Program management criteria (requirements of the program). Subcategories I-III define selection criteria for target diseases, subcategory IV defines criteria for how to establish and manage the program. In conclusion, this multi-dimensional framework serves as a well-balanced basis for developing thoroughly revised and internationally accepted consensus screening criteria.

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.