Sickle Cell Disease Newborn Screening—An Audit of a Twin Island State Pilot Program
, Jennifer M. Knight-Madden 5 and Claudine Richardson 1Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments for author File: 
Comments.docx
Author Response
Page 3 of 12 line 48 has been corrected as follows: ... that are in the "Recommended Uniform Screening Panel"...
Words in parenthesis were capitalized as they represent a formal noun.
Reviewer 2 Report
This is an important manuscript describing the audit of a newborn screening program, in place in Antigua and Barbuda. The authors present the data clearly.
I have a few questions:
-IS the program supported publicy or do parents have to pay?
-Were there technical issues in managing the samples? Or in performing the analyses?
-How do the authors plan to address the lack of knowledge by male partners regarding their status? Are public awareness campaigns planned?
Author Response
- The program is supported publicly, parents do not have to pay
- There were no significant technical issues in managing the samples. Once taken they were allowed to air dry for at least 4 hours, allowed to air dry, and then refrigerated. The only challenge reported by lab was when contamination of a sample was suspected, in which case they would suggest that a repeat sample be sent. There are three main situations in which a sample result is deemed to be inconclusive a. damaged sample, b. low haemoglobin level or low blood collection, c. haemoglobin A and F levels inconsistent with Gestational Age
- Public awareness campaigns are planned. Educational sessions for health care providers to include Urologists are also planned where males may be captured during their check-up. Pre-marital testing will also be an area of focus.
