Literature DB >> 9550991

Trade-offs in prenatal detection of Down syndrome.

M Serra-Prat1, P Gallo, A J Jovell, M Aymerich, M D Estrada.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This paper presents the results of different screening policies for prenatal detection of Down syndrome that would allow decision makers to make informed choices.
METHODS: A decision analysis model was built to compare 8 screening policies with regard to a selected set of outcome measures. Probabilities used in the analysis were obtained from official administrative data reports in Spain and Catalonia and from data published in the medical literature. Sensitivity analyses were carried out to test the robustness of screening policies' results to changes in uptake rates, diagnostic accuracy, and resources consumed.
RESULTS: Selected screening policies posed major trades-offs regarding detection rates, false-positive results, fetal loss, and costs of the programs. All outcome measures considered were found quite robust to changes in uptake rates. Sensitivity and specificity rates of screening tests were shown to be the most influential factors in the outcome measures considered.
CONCLUSIONS: The disclosed trade-offs emphasize the need to comprehensively inform decision makers about both positive and negative consequences of adopting one screening policy or another.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Catalonia; Empirical Approach; Genetics and Reproduction; Health Care and Public Health

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9550991      PMCID: PMC1508419          DOI: 10.2105/ajph.88.4.551

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Public Health        ISSN: 0090-0036            Impact factor:   9.308


  29 in total

1.  Ultrasound detection of Down syndrome: is it really possible?

Authors:  L Lynch; G S Berkowitz; U Chitkara; I A Wilkins; K E Mehalek; R L Berkowitz
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1989-02       Impact factor: 7.661

2.  Sensitivity and specificity of screening for Down syndrome with alpha-fetoprotein, hCG, unconjugated estriol, and maternal age.

Authors:  M L MacDonald; R M Wagner; R N Slotnick
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1991-01       Impact factor: 7.661

3.  Ultrasonographic detection of the second-trimester fetus with trisomy 18 and trisomy 21.

Authors:  N Ginsberg; A Cadkin; E Pergament; Y Verlinsky
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1990-10       Impact factor: 8.661

4.  Randomised controlled trial of genetic amniocentesis in 4606 low-risk women.

Authors:  A Tabor; J Philip; M Madsen; J Bang; E B Obel; B Nørgaard-Pedersen
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1986-06-07       Impact factor: 79.321

5.  Maternal serum screening for Down's syndrome in early pregnancy.

Authors:  N J Wald; H S Cuckle; J W Densem; K Nanchahal; P Royston; T Chard; J E Haddow; G J Knight; G E Palomaki; J A Canick
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1988-10-08

6.  A sonographic screening method for Down syndrome.

Authors:  C Lockwood; B Benacerraf; A Krinsky; K Blakemore; K Belanger; M Mahoney; J Hobbins
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1987-10       Impact factor: 8.661

7.  Sonographic identification of second-trimester fetuses with Down's syndrome.

Authors:  B R Benacerraf; R Gelman; F D Frigoletto
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1987-11-26       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Second-trimester sonographic diagnosis of Down syndrome: role of femur-length shortening and nuchal-fold thickening.

Authors:  R Perrella; A J Duerinckx; E G Grant; F Tessler; K Tabsh; B F Crandall
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1988-11       Impact factor: 3.959

9.  Decision analysis and screening for Down's syndrome. Estimate of uptake of amniocentesis is overoptimistic.

Authors:  D Murray; B Tennison
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1995-11-18

10.  Estimating a woman's risk of having a pregnancy associated with Down's syndrome using her age and serum alpha-fetoprotein level.

Authors:  H S Cuckle; N J Wald; S G Thompson
Journal:  Br J Obstet Gynaecol       Date:  1987-05
View more
  3 in total

1.  Cost-effectiveness and Down syndrome.

Authors:  T G Ganiats; S B Cantor
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 9.308

2.  Genetic testing in the European Union: does economic evaluation matter?

Authors:  Fernando Antoñanzas; R Rodríguez-Ibeas; M F Hutter; R Lorente; C Juárez; M Pinillos
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2011-05-20

Review 3.  Rational Down syndrome screening policy.

Authors:  H Cuckle
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 9.308

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.