The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Accuracy of non-invasive prenatal testing using cell-free DNA for detection of Down, Edwards and Patau syndromes: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Open accessAbstract
Objective: To measure test accuracy of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for Down, Edwards and Patau syndromes using cell-free fetal DNA and identify factors affecting accuracy. Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies. Data sources: PubMed, Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase and the Cochrane Library published from 1997 to 9 February 2015, followed by weekly autoalerts until 1 April 2015. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: English language journal articles describing case–control studies with ≥15 trisomy cases or cohort studies with ≥50 pregnant women who had been given NIPT and a reference standard. Results: 41, 37 and 30 studies of 2012 publications retrieved were included in the review for Down, Edwards and Patau syndromes. Quality appraisal identified high risk of bias in included studies, funnel plots showed evidence of publication bias. Pooled sensitivity was 99.3% (95% CI 98.9% to 99.6%) for Down, 97.4% (95.8% to 98.4%) for Edwards, and 97.4% (86.1% to 99.6%) for Patau syndrome. The pooled specificity was 99.9% (99.9% to 100%) for all three trisomies. In 100 000 pregnancies in the general obstetric population we would expect 417, 89 and 40 cases of Downs, Edwards and Patau syndromes to be detected by NIPT, with 94, 154 and 42 false positive results. Sensitivity was lower in twin than singleton pregnancies, reduced by 9% for Down, 28% for Edwards and 22% for Patau syndrome. Pooled sensitivity was also lower in the first trimester of pregnancy, in studies in the general obstetric population, and in cohort studies with consecutive enrolment. Conclusions: NIPT using cell-free fetal DNA has very high sensitivity and specificity for Down syndrome, with slightly lower sensitivity for Edwards and Patau syndrome. However, it is not 100% accurate and should not be used as a final diagnosis for positive cases. Trial registration number: CRD42014014947.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies
Whiting, P. F., Rutjes, A. W. S., Westwood, M. E., Mallett, S., Deeks, J. J., Reitsma, J. B., Leeflang, M. M. G., Sterne, J. A. C., Bossuyt, P. M. M., & the QUADAS-2 Group* (2011) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-155-8-201110180-00009 · Cited by 14,199
Reitsma, J. B., Glas, A. S., Rutjes, A. W. S., Scholten, R. J. P. M., Bossuyt, P. M., & Zwinderman, A. H. (2005) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.02.022 · Cited by 3,369
The diagnostic odds ratio: a single indicator of test performance
Glas, A. S., Lijmer, J. G., Prins, M. H., Bonsel, G. J., & Bossuyt, P. M. M. (2003) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/s0895-4356(03)00177-x · Cited by 2,261
Harbord, R. M., & Higgins, J. P. T. (2008) · The Stata Journal: Promoting communications on statistics and Stata · doi:10.1177/1536867x0800800403 · Cited by 897
Cell-free DNA Analysis for Noninvasive Examination of Trisomy
Norton, M. E., Jacobsson, B., Swamy, G. K., Laurent, L. C., Ranzini, A. C., Brar, H., Tomlinson, M. W., Pereira, L., Spitz, J. L., Hollemon, D., et al. (2015) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1407349 · Cited by 817
metandi: Meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy using hierarchical logistic regression
Harbord, R. M., & Whiting, P. (2009) · The Stata Journal: Promoting communications on statistics and Stata · doi:10.1177/1536867x0900900203 · Cited by 453
Multivariate Random-effects Meta-regression: Updates to Mvmeta
White, I. R. (2011) · The Stata Journal: Promoting communications on statistics and Stata · doi:10.1177/1536867x1101100206 · Cited by 400
Cited by
Antonarakis, S. E., Skotko, B. G., Rafii, M. S., Strydom, A., Pape, S. E., Bianchi, D. W., Sherman, S. L., & Reeves, R. H. (2020) · Nature Reviews Disease Primers · doi:10.1038/s41572-019-0143-7 · Cited by 964
Pierpont, M. E., Brueckner, M., Chung, W. K., Garg, V., Lacro, R. V., McGuire, A. L., Mital, S., Priest, J. R., Pu, W. T., Roberts, A., et al. (2018) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0000000000000606 · Cited by 654
van der Meij, K. R. M., Sistermans, E. A., Macville, M. V. E., Stevens, S. J. C., Bax, C. J., Bekker, M. N., Bilardo, C. M., Boon, E. M. J., Boter, M., Diderich, K. E. M., et al. (2019) · The American Journal of Human Genetics · doi:10.1016/j.ajhg.2019.10.005 · Cited by 372
Metadata
- Authors
- Taylor-Phillips, S., Freeman, K., Geppert, J., Agbebiyi, A., Uthman, O. A., Madan, J., Clarke, A., Quenby, S., & Clarke, A.
- Venue
- BMJ Open
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2016-01
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- e010002
- ISSN
- 2044-6055 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2258532034
- Cited by
- 410
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 9.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Accuracy of non-invasive prenatal testing using cell-free DNA for detection of Down, Edwards and Patau syndromes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010002
- The paper
- Taylor-Phillips, S., Freeman, K., Geppert, J., Agbebiyi, A., Uthman, O. A., Madan, J., Clarke, A., Quenby, S., & Clarke, A. (2016). Accuracy of non-invasive prenatal testing using cell-free DNA for detection of Down, Edwards and Patau syndromes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010002
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.