↓ Skip to main content

What's New in Prenatal Genetics? A Review of Current Recommendations and Guidelines

Overview of attention for article published in Obstetrical and Gynecological Survey, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
Title
What's New in Prenatal Genetics? A Review of Current Recommendations and Guidelines
Published in
Obstetrical and Gynecological Survey, October 2017
DOI 10.1097/ogx.0000000000000491
Pubmed ID
Authors

Annalisa L. Post, Amy T. Mottola, Jeffrey A. Kuller

Abstract

The rapid development of prenatal genetic testing and screening tools and choices constantly challenges clinicians to stay up to date on current best practice. We sought to review, compare, and summarize recent national society guidelines on prepregnancy genetic screening and prenatal diagnosis for aneuploidy with a focus on changes and additions to previous guidelines. We performed a descriptive review of 8 recently published (2016-2017) national guidelines and updates on prenatal genetic screening and testing including American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists committee opinions and practice bulletins, Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine consult series publications, and an American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics position statement. Topics included carrier screening, cell-free DNA screening, chromosomal microarray analysis, next-generation sequencing, and prenatal diagnostic testing. The recommendations in these publications were compared, and the additions and changes to previous recommendations and guidelines were summarized. Recent publications contain many updates and changes to previous screening and testing strategies, most of which are consistent between professional societies. Although many new technologies have been integrated into prenatal diagnosis, some newer technologies are not yet routinely recommended for widespread use, often because of lack of clinical trials and validation studies. Prenatal screening and testing options are rapidly expanding. To provide best-practice prenatal care, obstetric care providers should educate themselves about the most up-to-date recommendations and be prepared to interpret and apply these guidelines to their patients. Society guidelines are largely in agreement.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 6 25%
Student > Master 6 25%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 13%
Researcher 3 13%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 2 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 38%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 33%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Psychology 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 2 8%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 February 2018.
All research outputs
#4,275,118
of 17,065,319 outputs
Outputs from Obstetrical and Gynecological Survey
#98
of 1,951 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#92,165
of 325,021 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Obstetrical and Gynecological Survey
#2
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,065,319 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,951 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 325,021 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.