Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Sequential and contingent prenatal screening for Down syndrome.

Nicholas J Wald1, Alicja R Rudnicka, Jonathan P Bestwick

  • 1Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Barts and the London Queen Mary's School of Medicine and Dentistry, London EC1M 6BQ, UK. n.j.wald@qmul.ac.uk

Prenatal Diagnosis
|July 6, 2006
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Sternum-worn vibrotactile device in Parkinson's disease: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot trial.

NPJ Parkinson's disease·2026
Same author

Head-to-Head Comparative Evaluation of Four Commercially Available Artificial Intelligence Systems for Detecting Referable Diabetic Retinopathy in a Tanzanian Population.

Diabetes care·2026
Same author

Response to Takahashi regarding Bestwick and Wald: Mischaracterisation of evidence in prostate cancer screening.

Journal of medical screening·2026
Same author

Response to letter: 'Towards equitable implementation of AI-assisted screening for diabetic retinopathy: Perspectives on digital literacy, trust and system readiness in developing countries'.

Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association·2026
Same author

The Inherited Basis of Coronary Artery Disease.

The New England journal of medicine·2026
Same author

Screening for prostate cancer.

Journal of medical screening·2026

Integrated screening offers the best performance for prenatal Down syndrome detection. Sequential and contingent screening have drawbacks, making integrated screening the safest and most effective policy.

Area of Science:

  • Prenatal screening
  • Genetics
  • Maternal-fetal medicine

Background:

  • Down syndrome screening involves multiple policies with varying effectiveness.
  • Optimizing screening performance and safety is crucial for prenatal care.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare the effectiveness and safety of three prenatal Down syndrome screening policies: Integrated, Sequential, and Contingent screening.
  • To evaluate screening performance metrics including detection rates (DR) and false-positive rates (FPR).

Main Methods:

  • Monte Carlo simulation was used to estimate DR and FPR for each screening policy.
  • Cost-effectiveness analysis was performed for the different screening methods.
  • Data from the Serum Urine and Ultrasound Screening Study (SURUSS) were utilized.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • Integrated screening demonstrated superior performance compared to sequential and contingent screening.
  • Lowering the first-trimester FPR improved the performance of sequential and contingent screening.
  • Sequential and contingent screening identified 66% of affected pregnancies in the first trimester but carried risks of unnecessary terminations.

Conclusions:

  • Integrated screening is the simplest, most effective, and safest policy for prenatal Down syndrome screening.
  • Contingent screening is complex and has the lowest screening performance.
  • Early diagnosis benefits of sequential and contingent screening are outweighed by adverse consequences.