Free Access
Med Sci (Paris)
Volume 31, Number 10, Octobre 2015
Page(s) 929 - 932
Section Forum
Published online 19 October 2015
  1. Loeber JG, Burgard P, Cornel MC, et al. Newborn screening programmes in Europe: arguments and efforts regarding harmonization. Part 1. From blood spot to screening result. J Inherit Metab Dis 2012 ; 35 : 603–611. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Kemper AR, Green NS, Calonge N, et al. Decision-making process for conditions nominated to the recommended uniform screening panel: statement of the US Department of health and human services secretary’s advisory committee on heritable disorders in newborns and children. Genet Med 2014 ; 16 : 183–187. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Jordan B. Les retombées cliniques du séquençage de nouvelle génération. Med Sci (Paris) 2014 ; 30 : 589–593. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Howard HC, Knoppers BM, Cornel MC, et al. Whole-genome sequencing in newborn screening? A statement on the continued importance of targeted approaches in newborn screening programmes. Eur J Hum Genet 2015; 28 janvier. doi: 10.1038/ejhg.2014.289. [Google Scholar]
  5. Karow J. With up to $25M in NIH funding, four pilot projects will test genome sequencing in newborn screening. GenomeWeb Sept 4, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  6. Ashford M. Brigham and women’s, Boston children’s to evaluate benefits and risks of infant clinical sequencing. Genome Web Sept 11, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  7. Nowogrodzki A. Should babies have their genomes sequenced? MIT Technology Review, July 2, 2015. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.