Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42600089›Full record

ArticleUltrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology2026

Obtaining a Diagnostic Yield via Scan findings prior to the introduction of SEquencing retrospectivelY (ODYSSEY): a cohort study.

S Sonner, C Mckenna, C Flanagan, S Mckee, A Ververi, S Doyle, S Ong, A J Mcknight, F Mone

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

9 authors.

S SonnerCentre for Public Health, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0004-9517-1079
C MckennaNorthern Ireland Genomic Medicine Centre, Belfast Health and Social Care Trust, Belfast, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1763-4889
C FlanaganNorthern Ireland Genomic Medicine Centre, Belfast Health and Social Care Trust, Belfast, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-1058-5910
S MckeeNorthern Ireland Genomic Medicine Centre, Belfast Health and Social Care Trust, Belfast, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1772-0106
A VerveriDepartment of Genetics for Rare Diseases, Papageorgiou General Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0004-0974-5006
S DoyleCentre for Prenatal Genetics and Genomics, National Maternity Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6729-8281
S OngCentre for Fetal Medicine, Royal Jubilee Maternity Service, Belfast Health and Social Care Trust, Belfast, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-1651-7715
A J McknightCentre for Public Health, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7482-709X
F MoneCentre for Public Health, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0718-7547

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo determine the retrospective yield of prenatal exome sequencing (PES) by establishing the proportion of children with a postnatal monogenic diagnosis that could have been diagnosed prenatally if PES had been available.

methodsThe study cohort comprised a sample of children in Northern Ireland, born between January 2010 and January 2018 (predating routine availability of PES), who received a monogenic diagnosis postnatally via next generation sequencing as part of either of two UK-wide studies (the 100 000 Genomes Project (2015-2018) or the Deciphering Developmental Disorders study (2011-2015)). Clinical data were collected retrospectively and correlated with the current UK National Health Service PES protocol, including the phenotypic eligibility criteria for PES and the associated fetal anomalies gene panel. Cases were considered retrospective diagnoses if the fetal phenotype would have been eligible for PES and the diagnostic gene was included on the test panel, meaning prenatal diagnosis in this current era could have been feasible.

resultsOf 101 children, 17.8% (95% CI, 10.3-25.3%) had both an eligible fetal structural anomaly (FSA) (i.e. high-risk FSA) and a diagnostic gene on the associated test panel, meaning that they could have been diagnosed prenatally in the current clinical landscape. The median length of the diagnostic odyssey for this subgroup of children was 3.7 years (1354 (range, 822-2450) days). Moreover, 58.4% (n = 59) of cases had no anomalies detected prenatally and 19.8% (n = 20) had a FSA that would not meet the eligibility criteria for PES (low-risk FSA). Although these cases would have been ineligible for PES under the current clinical pathway, 89.9% (n = 71/79) were affected by severe or profound syndromes. Postnatally, the most common functional anomalies were neurodevelopmental delay/intellectual disability and/or behavioral abnormality, which were observed in 80.2% (n = 81) of the included children. However, 80.2% (n = 65/81) of these affected children did not present with fetal anomalies eligible for PES.

conclusionsAlmost one-fifth of children with a monogenic condition included in this study could have received a diagnosis via modern PES, avoiding a diagnostic odyssey lasting almost 4 years. However, despite having a monogenic condition, over half of the children did not present with any structural anomalies in utero. This demonstrates the degree to which fetal imaging is limited in its ability to reassure parents of the absence of a fetal genetic syndrome. © 2026 The Author(s). Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Indexed as

Congenital AbnormalitiesExome SequencingPrenatal DiagnosisFemaleGenetic TestingHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansInfant, NewbornMaleNorthern IrelandPregnancyRetrospective StudiesUltrasonography, Prenatalexome sequencingfetal anomalyfetusgenomicmonogenicnext generation sequencingprenatal

Identifiers

PMID42600089
PMCPMC13532116

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.