Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27277131›Full record

ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2017

Attitudes Toward Discussing Approved and Investigational Treatments for Cystic Fibrosis in Prenatal Genetic Counseling Practice.

Caroline Rung Elsas, Elinor Langfelder Schwind, Laura Hercher, Michael J Smith, Kara Gardner Young

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Prenatal genetic testing for cystic fibrosis: a systematic review of clinical effectiveness and an ethics review.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2020
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. 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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Caroline Rung ElsasSarah Lawrence College, Bronxville, NY, USA. crung@gm.slc.edu.
Elinor Langfelder SchwindMount Sinai Beth Israel, New York, NY, USA.
Laura HercherSarah Lawrence College, Bronxville, NY, USA.
Michael J SmithSarah Lawrence College, Bronxville, NY, USA.
Kara Gardner YoungMount Sinai Beth Israel, New York, NY, USA.
Sarah Lawrence College · USMount Sinai Beth Israel · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This project aimed to explore the attitudes of prenatal genetic counselors toward discussion of novel approved and experimental CF treatments in the prenatal setting, and to assess how knowledge of genotype-specific, targeted treatments may influence their current practices. Targeted treatments have the potential to impact the health-related quality of life of individuals affected with CF and therefore, knowledge of the availability of such treatments may influence the decision-making process of parents who receive a fetal diagnosis of CF. Using the 2012 FDA approval and introduction of ivacaftor into CF clinical practice as a case study, a survey was designed to explore the opinions and practices of prenatal genetic counselors with regard to counseling for a prenatal diagnosis of CF, and how those practices might be impacted by the availability of a new genotype-specific treatment. Approximately 800 genetic counselors were sent questionnaires in January of 2013. Respondents were provided information about this treatment and were asked to rate its perceived benefits, along with the likelihood that they would discuss potential benefits and limitations with parents receiving a prenatal diagnosis of CF. One-hundred sixty-nine prenatal genetic counselors (21.1 %) responded to the survey. Results indicated that 80 % of respondents 'never heard of the drug', or they were 'not exactly sure' what it was. After reading the materials provided, counselors felt the new treatment would have 'some' or a 'significant' impact on an affected individual's life. Their opinions varied on what information about this treatment they would choose to discuss with their patients; even if the treatment is currently FDA approved and clinically available for affected individuals with the genotype of the fetus. However, they would 'definitely' refer these patients to a specialist to discuss targeted treatments further. Most prenatal genetic counselors indicated there are certain scenarios in the prenatal setting which warrant a discussion of targeted treatments for CF, at least on some level. Counselor's views on sharing information about new treatment options are shaped by their familiarity with the treatment and their perception of its benefits and limitations, their comfort discussing these subjects, and their interpretation of the genetic counselor's role. Most genetic counselors had never heard of ivacaftor or Kalydeco™ prior to taking the survey. Therefore, counselors need to be better educated about the availability of CFTR mutation-based treatments before they will be able to incorporate discussion of new treatment options into their counseling.

Indexed as

Attitude to HealthPrenatal DiagnosisTherapies, InvestigationalAminophenolsChloride Channel AgonistsCounselorsCystic FibrosisDecision MakingFemaleGenetic CounselingGenetic TestingHumansMutationParentsPrecision MedicinePregnancyAminophenolsChloride Channel AgonistsivacaftorQuinolonesCystic fibrosisIvacaftorPersonalized medicinePrenatal genetic counselingTargeted treatments

Identifiers

PMID27277131
OpenAlexW2411346046

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.