Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

2 questions · 2 findings · 1 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 0 · 0%Very low 1 · 50%Low 1 · 50%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Closest answers

The findings closest to your search, judged one by one by TypeSafe's Jev model.

Related · question page
- Early amniocentesis vs transabdominal chorionic villus sampling · Anomalies (all recorded)
  Amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling for prenatal diagnosis 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.14 [0.57, 2.3]
  4 studies · 5305 participants
  Very low
Related · question page
- Transcervical vs transabdominal chorionic villus sampling · Anomalies (all recorded)
  Amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling for prenatal diagnosis 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.68 [0.41, 1.12]
  2 studies · 3622 participants
  Low

Transcervical vs transabdominal chorionic villus sampling

Anomalies (all recorded) · prenatal diagnosis

Transcervical showed no clear difference in anomalies (all recorded) compared with transabdominal chorionic villus sampling (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling for prenatal diagnosis 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.68 [0.41, 1.12]
2 studies · 3622 participants
Low

Early amniocentesis vs transabdominal chorionic villus sampling

Anomalies (all recorded) · prenatal diagnosis

It is very uncertain whether early amniocentesis changes anomalies (all recorded) compared with transabdominal chorionic villus sampling (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling for prenatal diagnosis 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 1.14 [0.57, 2.3]
4 studies · 5305 participants
Very low