↓ Skip to main content

Improving newborn screening for cystic fibrosis using next-generation sequencing technology: a technical feasibility study

Overview of attention for article published in Genetics in Medicine, February 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
20 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
79 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
109 Mendeley
Title
Improving newborn screening for cystic fibrosis using next-generation sequencing technology: a technical feasibility study
Published in
Genetics in Medicine, February 2015
DOI 10.1038/gim.2014.209
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mei W. Baker, Anne E. Atkins, Suzanne K. Cordovado, Miyono Hendrix, Marie C. Earley, Philip M. Farrell

Abstract

Purpose:Many regions have implemented newborn screening (NBS) for cystic fibrosis (CF) using a limited panel of cystic fibrosis transmembrane regulator (CFTR) mutations after immunoreactive trypsinogen (IRT) analysis. We sought to assess the feasibility of further improving the screening using next-generation sequencing (NGS) technology.Methods:An NGS assay was used to detect 162 CFTR mutations/variants characterized by the CFTR2 project. We used 67 dried blood spots (DBSs) containing 48 distinct CFTR mutations to validate the assay. NGS assay was retrospectively performed on 165 CF screen-positive samples with one CFTR mutation.Results:The NGS assay was successfully performed using DNA isolated from DBSs, and it correctly detected all CFTR mutations in the validation. Among 165 screen-positive infants with one CFTR mutation, no additional disease-causing mutation was identified in 151 samples consistent with normal sweat tests. Five infants had a CF-causing mutation that was not included in this panel, and nine with two CF-causing mutations were identified.Conclusion:The NGS assay was 100% concordant with traditional methods. Retrospective analysis results indicate an IRT/NGS screening algorithm would enable high sensitivity, better specificity and positive predictive value (PPV). This study lays the foundation for prospective studies and for introducing NGS in NBS laboratories.Genet Med advance online publication 12 February 2015Genetics in Medicine (2015); doi:10.1038/gim.2014.209.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 109 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Unknown 107 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 22 20%
Student > Master 15 14%
Student > Bachelor 14 13%
Other 12 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 6%
Other 13 12%
Unknown 27 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 27 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 21 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 20 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 2%
Psychology 2 2%
Other 9 8%
Unknown 28 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. 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 21 August 2019.
All research outputs
#1,696,324
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Genetics in Medicine
#570
of 2,943 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,811
of 367,438 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genetics in Medicine
#9
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,943 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 367,438 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.