ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2016
Prenatal testing in Huntington disease: after the test, choices recommence.
Article in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- The attitudes of individuals with or at risk of adult-onset genetic conditions on reproductive genetic testing: A systematic review.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Pooled it
- The Recommendation Paradox: Perspectives on Genetic Testing in Huntington's Disease Families.Journal of genetic counseling · 2026Article
- Cascade counselling and testing. Recommendations of the European Society of Human Genetics.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- Fetal information as shared information: using NIPT to test for adult-onset conditions.Monash bioethics review · 2021Article
- A case-note review of continued pregnancies found to be at a high risk of Huntington's disease: considerations for clinical practice.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of this study was (1) to determine the impact of prenatal diagnosis (PND) for Huntington disease (HD) on subsequent reproductive choices and family structure; and (2) to assess whether children born after PND were informed of their genetic status. Out of 354 presymptomatic carriers of HD gene mutation, aged 18-45 years, 61 couples requested 101 PNDs. Fifty-four women, 29 female carriers and 25 spouses of male carriers, accepted to be interviewed (0.6-16.3 years after the last PND, median 6.5 years) on their obstetrical history and information given to children born after PND. Women were willing to undergo two or more PNDs with a final success rate of 75%. Reproductive decisions differed depending on the outcome of the first PND. If favourable, 62% couples decided against another pregnancy and 10% chose to have an untested child. If unfavourable, 83% decided for another pregnancy (P<0.01), and the majority (87%) re-entered the PND procedure. In contrast, after a second PND, only 37% asked for a PND and 30% chose to have an untested child. Thirty-three percent had both, tested and untested children. Among children born after PND, 10 years and older, 75% were informed of their genetic status. The decision to prevent transmission of the HD mutation is made anew with each pregnancy. Couples may need more psychological support after PND and pre-counselling sessions should take into account the effect of the outcome of a first PND on subsequent reproductive choices.
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.