Cited by 46Sexual Differentiation and DisordersMetabolism and Genetic DisordersAdrenal Hormones and Disorders

Congenital adrenal hyperplasia and the second newborn screen

Chan, Christine L., McFann, Kim, Taylor, Laura, Wright, Daniel, Zeitler, Philip S., Barker, Jennifer M.·2013·The Journal of Pediatrics

Abstract

Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of a second newborn screen for congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH) in the state of Colorado and report characteristics associated with cases identified on the first versus second screen.Study design Colorado implemented newborn screening for CAH with 17-hydroxyprogesterone beginning August 2000. The first screening is performed within 72 hours of life and the second between 8 and 14 days of life. We compared infants diagnosed on the basis of the first versus second newborn screen.Results The first screen identified 29 cases of which 28 represented classical CAH. The incidence of classical CAH on the first screen was 1:24,766. The second screen identified 17 additional cases, of which 11 represented classical CAH. Combined, the incidence of classical CAH was 1:17,789. The sensitivity of the first screen was 71.79%. The false negative rate of the first screen was 28.2%. In the absence of a second screen, 1:47,824 infants would have been missed. Infants diagnosed on the first screen had higher 17-hydroxyprogesterone values compared with those diagnosed on the second screen (P = .0008).Conclusions The use of a single newborn screen for CAH missed nearly 30% of classical CAH cases in Colorado. Addition of a second screen, therefore, can improve the operating characteristics of the newborn screening program.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jpeds.2013.01.002

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 22 · Cited by 46

Authors
Chan, C. L., McFann, K., Taylor, L., Wright, D., Zeitler, P. S., & Barker, J. M.
Affiliations
  • Children's Hospital Colorado (US)
  • Colorado School of Public Health (US)
  • Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (US)
Corresponding author
Chan, Christine L.
Venue
The Journal of Pediatrics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-07
Volume
163
Issue
1
Pages
109-113.e1
ISSN
0022-3476 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2040071231
Cited by
46
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 3
FWCI
1.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Journal of Pediatrics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (T32DK063687)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Sexual Differentiation and Disorders
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Clinical Biochemistry › Metabolism and Genetic Disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Adrenal Hormones and Disorders
Keywords
congenital adrenal hyperplasia, newborn screening, second screening, 17-hydroxyprogesterone, screening sensitivity, false negative rate, screening incidence, Colorado
MeSH terms
Adrenal Hyperplasia, Congenital, Female, Humans, Infant, Newborn, Male, Neonatal Screening

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review