ArticleInternational journal of neonatal screening2026
A Multi-Stakeholder Perspective on Integrating Genomic Sequencing into Newborn Screening: An Interview Study.
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. 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Interest in the genomic sequencing of healthy newborns has raised a discussion on whether this technology should be introduced into existing newborn screening (NBS) programs. This qualitative study explores a multi-stakeholder perspective on the future of genomic sequencing in NBS. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 26 professionals involved in NBS or in clinical genome sequencing in the Netherlands. Participants highlighted opportunities such as the possibility to use one test for a wide range of genetic conditions, reducing diagnostic odyssey, expanding the scope of NBS, and increasing program efficiency. Challenges were raised regarding genetic variant interpretation, expected increased parental anxiety, data privacy issues, difficulties with information provision, and high costs. Three areas of tension between participants' perspectives were identified: screening strategy, screening performance, and roles and responsibilities. It was emphasized that implementing genomic sequencing should not risk reducing the current high NBS participation, and that enhancing knowledge, communication, and collaboration between all stakeholders is needed. Although most participants did not believe genomic sequencing as a first-tier test is currently desirable and feasible, they acknowledged it has a role to play in the future of NBS. Future decision-making should consider the potential impact on the participation rate, program quality, and balancing benefits and harms.
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.