ReviewGenes2021
Chances and Challenges of New Genetic Screening Technologies (NIPT) in Prenatal Medicine from a Clinical Perspective: A Narrative Review.
Review in Genes, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 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
32 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 71 citations in OpenAlex.
- AI-guided meta-analysis of non-invasive prenatal testing platforms for trisomy 21 screening: comparative evaluation of cffDNA and fetal cell-based approaches.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Pooled it
- Effects of an animated educational video on knowledge of cell-free DNA screening among Thai pregnant women: a randomized control trial.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2023Trial
- A Simplified Workflow for the Prediction of Putative Viral Reads Using NIPT Data.Prenatal diagnosis · 2026Article
- Radiogenomics of congenital brain malformations: Linking embryology, genetics, and imaging.Neuroradiology · 2026Review
- Application of chromosomal microarray analysis for prenatal diagnosis in 315 ultrasonically abnormal fetuses.Frontiers in genetics · 2026Article
- Early non-invasive epigenetic approach for assessing trisomy risk in maternal plasma.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Molecular genetic and pregnancy outcomes of fetuses with increased Nuchal Translucency.PloS one · 2026Article
- Insights and Experiences From the 'Gatekeepers': A Qualitative Study Exploring Clinician Perspectives on Providing Publicly Funded Prenatal Exome Sequencing.The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology · 2025Article
- Article
- Retrospective study on NIPT or NIPT plus combined with ultrasound in screening fetal chromosomal abnormalities.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Clinical Application of Noninvasive Prenatal Testing in Singleton Pregnancy with and without in vitro Fertilization: A 6-year Observational Study at a Single Tertiary Center.International journal of women's health · 2025Article
- NIPT Integration as a Patient-Paid Prenatal Screening Option-Observations and Challenges from a Bulgarian Genetic Counseling Center.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- On the Search for Potentially Anomalous Traces of Cosmic Ray Particles in Images Acquired by Cmos Detectors for a Continuous Stream of Emerging Observational Data.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Article
- Correlation between telomere shortening in maternal peripheral blood and fetal aneuploidy.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Article
- Non-Invasive Screening Test Paradox in a Case Born with Mixed Gonadal Dysgenesis (45,X/46,Xy).Balkan journal of medical genetics : BJMG · 2023Article
- Population monitoring of trisomy 21: problems and approaches.Molecular cytogenetics · 2023Review
- The role of non-invasive prenatal testing and ultrasound in prenatal screening of fetal chromosomal abnormalities in singleton: a retrospective study.Annals of translational medicine · 2023Article
- Decision-making process about prenatal genetic screening: how deeply do moms-to-be want to know from Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing?BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2023Article
- The role of mid-trimester ultrasound scan: scope and limitations.Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992) · 2023Article
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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In 1959, 63 years after the death of John Langdon Down, Jérôme Lejeune discovered trisomy 21 as the genetic reason for Down syndrome. Screening for Down syndrome has been applied since the 1960s by using maternal age as the risk parameter. Since then, several advances have been made. First trimester screening, combining maternal age, maternal serum parameters and ultrasound findings, emerged in the 1990s with a detection rate (DR) of around 90-95% and a false positive rate (FPR) of around 5%, also looking for trisomy 13 and 18. With the development of high-resolution ultrasound, around 50% of fetal anomalies are now detected in the first trimester. Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for trisomy 21, 13 and 18 is a highly efficient screening method and has been applied as a first-line or a contingent screening approach all over the world since 2012, in some countries without a systematic screening program. Concomitant with the rise in technology, the possibility of screening for other genetic conditions by analysis of cfDNA, such as sex chromosome anomalies (SCAs), rare autosomal anomalies (RATs) and microdeletions and duplications, is offered by different providers to an often not preselected population of pregnant women. Most of the research in the field is done by commercial providers, and some of the tests are on the market without validated data on test performance. This raises difficulties in the counseling process and makes it nearly impossible to obtain informed consent. In parallel with the advent of new screening technologies, an expansion of diagnostic methods has begun to be applied after invasive procedures. The karyotype has been the gold standard for decades. Chromosomal microarrays (CMAs) able to detect deletions and duplications on a submicroscopic level have replaced the conventional karyotyping in many countries. Sequencing methods such as whole exome sequencing (WES) and whole genome sequencing (WGS) tremendously amplify the diagnostic yield in fetuses with ultrasound anomalies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.