Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25200794›Full record

ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2015

Cystic fibrosis: to screen or not to screen? Involving a Citizens' jury in decisions on screening carrier.

Paola Mosconi, Carlo Castellani, Walter Villani, Roberto Satolli

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Public perspectives on acquired brain injury rehabilitation and components of care: A Citizens' Jury.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021
    Article
  4. Effect of Public Deliberation on Patient Attitudes Regarding Consent and Data Use in a Learning Health Care System for Oncology.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2019
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. CJCheck Stage 1: development and testing of a checklist for reporting community juries - Delphi process and analysis of studies published in 1996-2015.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2017
    Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

4 authors.

Paola MosconiLaboratory for medical research and consumer involvement, Public Health Dept, IRCCS-Istituto di Ricerche Farmacologiche Mario Negri, Milano, Italy.
Carlo CastellaniClinical Genetics and Neonatal Screening Services, Cystic Fibrosis Center, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata, Verona, Italy.
Walter VillaniLaboratory for medical research and consumer involvement, Public Health Dept, IRCCS-Istituto di Ricerche Farmacologiche Mario Negri, Milano, Italy.
Roberto SatolliAgenzia Editoria Scientifica Zadig, Milano, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

contextIn recent years, the continuous improvements in molecular biology techniques have made it possible to detect carriers for several genetic conditions, including cystic fibrosis (CF). In some countries, CF carrier screening is offered to increasing subset of the general population. Offering of carrier screening at a population level should not be decided by local health authorities only, without consulting citizens' preferences. One way to involve citizens in the decision process might be to a Citizens' jury, a method of deliberative democracy.

objectiveThe object of the study is to produce a recommendation statement about CF carrier screening using a Citizens' jury. As this is a new method in the field, the study also provided the opportunity to evaluate its effectiveness.

designThe project is designed and managed by an executive committee. The whole process is superintended by a multidisciplinary scientific committee. The 16 members of the jury attend a 1 day meeting, assisted by a non-medical and unbiased facilitator. Informative material was prepared and distributed 15 days before the jury meeting; during the meeting, experts and witnesses interact directly with all the jurors through questions and answers.

resultsAll except one member of the jury felt positively about the Health Service actively providing population carrier screening for CF. The final statement was available to public, clinicians, researchers and decision-makers. DISCUSSION: In general, a Citizens' jury is a feasible method for involving citizens in public health decision-making process and in particular for obtaining a community view about CF carrier screening.

Indexed as

Community ParticipationDecision MakingGenetic TestingCystic FibrosisHealth PrioritiesHumansItalyMass ScreeningPublic Opinioncitizens' jurycystic fibrosiscystic fibrosis carrier screening

Identifiers

PMID25200794
PMCPMC5810749

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.