ArticleGenetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics2008
A pilot assessment of parental practices and attitudes regarding risk disclosure and clinical research involving children in Huntington disease families.
Article in Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Prenatal testing in Huntington disease: after the test, choices recommence.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo characterize parental practices of informing children of risk for Huntington disease (HD), and to understand the attitudes of parents concerning childhood participation in HD research.
methodsAn anonymous Internet survey was accessed by individuals of HD families. The survey probed for data regarding individual risk for HD, as well as when or if children had been informed of the disease. Respondents expressed their attitudes concerning childhood participation in HD clinical research.
resultsTwo hundred forty-nine individuals responded (approximately 80% female), and 84% had never participated in an HD clinical trial. Seventy-five percent of respondents were parents; nearly two thirds of them had provided some information about HD to their children. There was overwhelming support for affected, at-risk, and unaffected adults in terms of HD research participation, but there was a statistically significant disparity by gene status, with gene negative and symptomatic gene positive adults being more inclined to participate than at-risk or asymptomatic/gene positive adults. More than 50% of respondents supported childhood participation, but typically in late adolescence (15-18 years). Gene negative and symptomatic adults were statistically more likely to agree with childhood inclusion than at-risk or asymptomatic/gene positive adults.
conclusionThese results serve as pilot data for further investigations to address childhood participation in HD research. In addition, these findings will inform ongoing studies as to appropriate practices to undertake to include minors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.