Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19449415›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of medical genetics. Part A2009

A prospective, longitudinal study of the impact of GJB2/GJB6 genetic testing on the beliefs and attitudes of parents of deaf and hard-of-hearing infants.

Christina G S Palmer, Ariadna Martinez, Michelle Fox, Jin Zhou, Nina Shapiro, Yvonne Sininger, Wayne W Grody, Lisa A Schimmenti

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of medical genetics. Part A, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 36% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. A proposal for comprehensive newborn hearing screening to improve identification of deaf and hard-of-hearing children.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2019
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Prevalence of genetic testing in CHARGE syndrome.Journal of genetic counseling · 2011
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Christina G S PalmerDepartment of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA. cpalmer@mednet.ucla.edu
Ariadna Martinez
Michelle Fox
Jin Zhou
Nina Shapiro
Yvonne Sininger
Wayne W Grody
Lisa A Schimmenti
University of California, Los Angeles · USDoheny Eye Institute · USUCLA Health · USUniversity of Minnesota · US

Funding

Outcomes of Cx26 Testing in Deaf/Hard of Hearing AdultsR01HG003871 · NHGRI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI PALMER, CHRISTINA GERMAINE · 2006 to 2009
$2.1M
Connexin 26 Testing in InfantsR01DC005663 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI PALMER, CHRISTINA GERMAINE · 2002 to 2005
$1.4M
NHGRI NIH HHS R01 HG003871NHGRI NIH HHS R01HG003871NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC005663NIDCD NIH HHS R01DC005663
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There are limited data on the impact of incorporating genetic counseling and testing into the newborn hearing screening process. We report on results from a prospective, longitudinal study to determine the impact of genetic counseling and GJB2/GJB6 genetic testing on parental knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs about genetic testing. One hundred thirty culturally hearing parents of 93 deaf or hard-of-hearing children ages 0-3 years primarily identified through newborn hearing screening received pre- and post-test genetic counseling for GJB2 and GJB6. Parents completed questionnaires following pre-test counseling, and 1- and 6-month post-test result disclosure. Results indicate that following pre-test counseling all parents perceived benefits to genetic testing. While parents who received positive results continued to perceive benefits from testing, perceived benefit declined among parents who received inconclusive or negative results. Parents did not perceive genetic testing as harmful following pre-test counseling or receipt of test results. Parents who received positive test results performed better in understanding recurrence and causation of their child's deafness and indicated greater interest in prenatal genetic testing than those who received inconclusive or negative test results. Parents felt that pediatricians and audiologists should inform parents of genetic testing availability; however, there was no consensus on timing of this discussion. Thus culturally hearing parents do not perceive genetic testing of their deaf or hard-of-hearing infants/toddlers as harmful; they feel that primary care providers should discuss genetic testing with them; and positive genetic test results with genetic counseling give rise to better understanding and perceived benefit than negative or inconclusive results.

Indexed as

AttitudeCultureAdultConnexin 26Connexin 30ConnexinsDeafnessDNAFathersGenetic CounselingGenetic TestingHumansInfantInfant, NewbornLongitudinal StudiesMothersConnexin 26Connexin 30ConnexinsDNAGJB2 protein, humanGJB6 protein, human

Identifiers

PMID19449415
PMCPMC2866144
OpenAlexW2107042697

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.