ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2015
'And then you can decide'--antenatal foetal diagnosis decision making in South Africa.
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 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, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Co-creation of a toolkit to assist risk communication and clinical decision-making in severe preeclampsia: SPOT-Impact study design.Global health action · 2024Article
- Genetic counseling in South Africa: A growing profession.Genetics in medicine open · 2024Article
- Communication in high risk ante-natal consultations: a direct observational study of interactions between patients and obstetricians.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2020Observational
- It's complicated - Factors predicting decisional conflict in prenatal diagnostic testing.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2016Article
- Exploring Women's Experiences of Amniocentesis: A Qualitative Content Analysis.Iranian journal of nursing and midwifery researchArticle
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 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDecision making is integral to genetic counselling and the premise is that autonomous decisions emerge if patients are provided with information in a non-directive manner. The pivotal activity in antenatal diagnosis counselling with at-risk pregnant women is decision making regarding invasive procedures. This process is not well understood in multicultural settings.
objectiveThis study examined multicultural genetic counselling interactions with women of advanced maternal age (AMA). It aimed to investigate the participants' orientation towards the amniocentesis decision.
designData were collected during 14 video-recorded consultations between six genetic counsellors and 14 women of AMA in a genetic counselling clinic in South Africa. The design was qualitative and conversation analysis was used for analysis.
resultsAnalysis revealed that counsellors used several strategies to facilitate discussions and decision making. However, the invitation to make a decision regarding amniocentesis was not perceived as being neutral. Both the counsellors and the women appeared to treat the offer as one which should be accepted. This resulted in a paradox, as strategies intended to allow neutral discussion seem to achieve the opposite. It is suggested that these results may be linked to the local health-care setting.
conclusionThe results suggest that the understanding of decision-making processes and enhancing autonomy may require a more detailed investigation into psychosocial, political and historical factors in the local health-care setting. Models of practice as well as the training of genetic counsellors need to be sensitive to these influences. A closer examination of interactional variables may yield new and relevant insights for the profession.
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.