The limited use of US residual newborn screening dried bloodspots for health disparity research.

PURPOSE: State-run newborn screening programs screen nearly all babies born in the United States at the time of delivery. After newborn screening has been completed, some states store the residual dried bloodspots. It is unknown how they have been used to address health disparities-related research. METHODS: In 2017-2018, a scoping review was conducted to evaluate the extent, type, and nature of how residual dried bloodspots. The review included 654 eligible publications, worldwide, published before May 2017. A post hoc analysis of the US-based studies using residual dried bloodspots (n = 192) were analyzed. RESULTS: There were 32 (16.7%) articles identified that studied a condition of a known health disparity or focused on a key population: 25 studies assessed a disease or condition, 6 expressly enrolled a key population, and 1 study included both (i.e., heart disease and African American/Black). CONCLUSION: Excluding 12 studies that researched leukemia or a brain tumor, only 20 studies addressed a known health disparity, with 6 stating a specific aim to address a health disparity. This resource could be used to gain further knowledge about health disparities, but is currently underutilized.

Evaluating Harms in the Assessment of Net Benefit: A Framework for Newborn Screening Condition Review.

BACKGROUND: The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Advisory Committee on Heritable Disorders in Newborns and Children ("Advisory Committee") makes recommendations to the HHS Secretary regarding addition of new conditions to the national Recommended Uniform Screening Panel for newborns. The Advisory Committee's decision-making process includes assessing the net benefit of screening for nominated conditions, informed by systematic evidence reviews generated by an independent Condition Review Workgroup. The evidence base regarding harms associated with screening for specific conditions is often more limited than that for benefits. PROCEDURES: The process for defining potential harms from newborn screening reviewed the frameworks from other public health evidence-based review processes, adapted to newborn screening by experts in systematic review, newborn screening programs and bioethics, with input from and approval by the Advisory Committee. MAIN FINDINGS: To support the Advisory Committee's review of nominated conditions, the Workgroup has developed a standardized approach to evaluation of harms and relevant gaps in the evidence. Types of harms include the physical burden to infants; psychosocial and logistic burdens to families from screening or diagnostic evaluation; increased risk of medical treatment for infants diagnosed earlier than children with clinical presentation; delayed diagnosis from false negative results; psychosocial harm from false positive results; uncertainty of clinical diagnosis, age of onset or clinical spectrum; and disparities in access to diagnosis or therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Estimating the numbers of children at risk, the magnitude, timing and likelihood of harms will be integrated into Workgroup reports to the Advisory Committee.

US public cord blood banking practices: recruitment, donation, and the timing of consent.

BACKGROUND: Cord blood has moved rapidly from an experimental stem cell source to an accepted and important source of hematopoietic stem cells. There has been no comprehensive assessment of US public cord blood banking practices since the Institute of Medicine study in 2005. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Of 34 US public cord blood banks identified, 16 participated in our qualitative survey of public cord blood banking practices. Participants took part in in-depth telephone interviews in which they were asked structured and open-ended questions regarding recruitment, donation, and the informed consent process at these banks. RESULTS: Thirteen of 16 participants reported a variably high percentage of women who consented to public cord blood donation. Fifteen banks offered donor registration at the time of hospital admission for labor and delivery. Seven obtained full informed consent and medical history during early labor and eight conducted some form of phased consent and/or phased medical screening and history. Nine participants identified initial selection of the collection site location as the chief mode by which they recruited minority donors. CONCLUSION: Since 2005, more public banks offer cord blood donor registration at the time of admission for labor and delivery. That and the targeted location of cord blood collection sites are the main methods used to increase access to donation and HLA diversity of banked units. Currently, the ability to collect and process donations, rather than donor willingness, is the major barrier to public cord blood banking.