Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21852698›Full record

Trial reportJournal of medical screening2011

Impact on informed choice of offering antenatal sickle cell and thalassaemia screening in primary care: a randomized trial.

Katrina Brown, Elizabeth Dormandy, Erin Reid, Martin Gulliford, Theresa Marteau

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of medical screening, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Development of a fragile X syndrome (FXS) knowledge scale: towards a modified multidimensional measure of informed choice for FXS population carrier screening.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2015
    Article
  13. Genetic advances in medicine: has the promise been fulfilled in general practice?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2012
    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

5 authors.

Katrina BrownDepartment of Psychology, King's College London, Health Psychology Section, 5th Floor Bermondsey Wing, Guy's Campus, London SE1 9RT.
Elizabeth Dormandy
Erin Reid
Martin Gulliford
Theresa Marteau

Funding

Department of Health 03/02/03
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesOffering antenatal sickle cell and thalassaemia (SCT) screening early in pregnancy can maximize the range of post-screening choices available, however these benefits should not be obtained at the expense of informed choice.  This study examined whether offering this screening in primary care at the time of pregnancy confirmation compromises women making informed choices. Design Partial factorial, cluster randomized controlled trial.

setting25 general practices in two socially deprived UK areas. Participants 464 pregnant women offered antenatal SCT screening. Intervention Practices were randomly allocated to offer pregnant women screening:  i) in primary care at time of pregnancy confirmation, with parallel partner testing (n = 191), ii) in primary care at time of pregnancy confirmation, with sequential partner testing (n = 158), or iii) in secondary care by midwives, with sequential partner testing (standard care, n = 115). Main outcome Informed choice - a classification based on attitudes, knowledge and test uptake.

results91% of woman underwent screening. About a third (30.6%) made an informed choice to accept or decline screening: 34% in primary care parallel group; 23.4% in primary care sequential and 34.8% in secondary care sequential. Allowing for adjustments, rates of informed choice did not vary by intervention group: secondary care versus primary care with parallel partner testing OR 1.07 (95% CI 0.56 to 2.02); secondary care versus primary care with sequential partner testing OR 0.67 (95% CI 0.36 to 1.25).  Uninformed choices were generally attributable to poor knowledge (65%).

conclusionOffering antenatal SCT screening in primary care did not reduce the likelihood that women made informed choices. Rates of informed choice were low and could be increased by improving knowledge.

Indexed as

Choice BehaviorPrenatal DiagnosisAdultAnemia, Sickle CellFemaleHumansMass ScreeningPregnancyPrimary Health CareThalassemiaYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID21852698
PMCPMC3157892

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.