ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2013
The current state of genetic counseling before and after amniocentesis for fetal karyotyping in Japan: a survey of obstetric hospital clients of a prenatal testing laboratory.
Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- The composition and capacity of the clinical genetics workforce in high-income countries: a scoping review.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2020Article
- Genetic Counseling for Couples Seeking Noninvasive Prenatal Testing in Japan: Experiences of Pregnant Women and their Partners.Journal of genetic counseling · 2017Article
- Nationwide survey for current clinical status of amniocentesis and maternal serum marker test in Japan.Journal of human genetics · 2016Article
- Chromosome abnormalities diagnosed in utero: a Japanese study of 28 983 amniotic fluid specimens collected before 22 weeks gestations.Journal of human genetics · 2015Article
- Current status of preimplantation genetic diagnosis in Japan.Bioinformation · 2015Article
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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pregnant women undergoing prenatal genetic testing should receive genetic counseling so they can make informed decisions. We examined the current state of providing genetic counseling in Japan to pregnant women before they elected amniocentesis for prenatal diagnosis of chromosome abnormalities and after test results were completed, and explored the opportunity for expanding access to certified genetic counselors (CGC) at clinical practices offering amniocentesis. An anonymous survey was mailed to the 298 hospitals that referred amniotic fluid specimens to LabCorp Japan in 2009. Most genetic counseling was provided by the obstetrician alone; 73.8 % (76/103) of pre-amniocentesis, 82.5 % (85/103) if normal results, and 49.4 % (44/89) if abnormal results. Respondents spent limited time in genetic counseling; 57.3 % spent <10 min for pre-amniocentesis, 88.3 % spent <10 min for normal results, and 54.0 % spent <20 min for abnormal results. While 45.8 % indicated that CGC do not have an essential role in clinical practice, responses that supported employment of CGC were more likely to come from hospitals that submitted more than ten specimens annually (p < 0.0001), university hospitals (p < 0.0001), and MD geneticists (p = 0.020). Currently, there is limited genetic counseling available in Japan. This indicates there are opportunities for the employment of CGC to improve the quality of genetic counseling.
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.