SMA carrier testing: a meta‐analysis of differences in test performance by ethnic group
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) is a severe autosomal recessive genetic disease that occurs in about one in every 10 000 births. Prenatal carrier testing is available for SMA, and the utility of universal screening is actively debated. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of SMA genotype frequency, carrier frequency, and carrier test performance in different ethnic groups. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of the literature for studies on SMA carrier screening test performance. Ethnicity-specific allele frequencies, carrier rates, and screening test performance were determined from data of 169 000 individuals in 14 published studies. Pooled estimates were calculated for each ethnic group using a random effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: The detection rate of SMA screening in the non-Black population was 87-95%; however, detection rates fell to 71% among the Black population. CONCLUSION: These results highlight that although SMA carrier testing generally performs well and could be considered as a routine prenatal screen, SMA testing should be used cautiously in the Black population.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.042 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.013 | 0.039 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".