Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21819310›Full record

ArticleEthnicity & health2012

A case study of haemoglobinopathy screening in the Netherlands: witnessing the past, lessons for the future.

Suze M P J Jans, Carla G van El, Eddy S Houwaart, Marjan J Westerman, Rien J P A Janssens, Antoinette L M Lagro-Janssen, Anne Marie C Plass, Martina C Cornel

Open access · greenAbstract readConsensus Statement
In one paragraph

Article in Ethnicity & health, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Suze M P J JansClinical Genetics, Section Community Genetics, EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. s.jans@vumc.nl
Carla G van El
Eddy S Houwaart
Marjan J Westerman
Rien J P A Janssens
Antoinette L M Lagro-Janssen
Anne Marie C Plass
Martina C Cornel
EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research · NLRadboud University Nijmegen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesIn 2007 neonatal screening (NNS) was expanded to include screening for sickle cell disease (SCD) and beta-thalassaemia. Up until that year no formal recommendations for haemoglobinopathy (carrier) screening existed in the Netherlands. Although it has been subject to debate in the past, preconceptional and prenatal haemoglobinopathy carrier screening are not part of routine healthcare in the Netherlands. This study aimed to explore the decision-making process of the past: why was the introduction of a screening programme for haemoglobinopathy considered to be untimely, and did ethnicity play a role given the history in other countries surrounding the introduction of haemoglobinopathy screening?

designA witness seminar was organised, inviting key figures to discuss the decision-making process concerning haemoglobinopathy screening in the Netherlands, thereby adding new perspectives on past events. The transcript was content-analysed.

resultsThe subject of haemoglobinopathy screening first appeared in the 1970s. As opposed to a long history of neglect of African-American health in the United States, the heritage of the Second World War influenced the decision-making process in the Netherlands. As a consequence, registration of ethnicity surfaced as an impeding factor. However, overall, official Dutch screening policy was restrained regarding reproductive issues caused by fear of eugenics. In the 1990s haemoglobinopathy screening was found to be 'not opportune' due to low prevalence, lack of knowledge and fear of stigmatisation. Currently the registration of ethnicity remains on the political agenda, but still proves to be a sensitive subject. DISCUSSION: Carrier screening in general never appeared high on the policy agenda. Registration of ethnicity remains sensitive caused by the current political climate. Complexities related to carrier screening are a challenge in Dutch healthcare. Whether carrier screening will be considered a valuable complementary strategy in the Netherlands, depends partly on participation of representatives of high-risk groups in policy making.

Indexed as

Decision MakingEthnicityHeterozygoteHealth PolicyHemoglobinopathiesHumansInfant, NewbornNeonatal ScreeningNetherlandsPatient Acceptance of Health CarePolitics

Identifiers

PMID21819310
PMCPMC3396381
OpenAlexW2143122298

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.