Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27793792›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2016

Role of Psychosocial Factors and Health Literacy in Pregnant Women's Intention to Use a Decision Aid for Down Syndrome Screening: A Theory-Based Web Survey.

Agathe Delanoë, Johanie Lépine, Stéphane Turcotte, Maria Esther Leiva Portocarrero, Hubert Robitaille, Anik Mc Giguère, Brenda J Wilson, Holly O Witteman, Isabelle Lévesque, Laurence Guillaumie and 1 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04162288 (RCT Protocol for Evaluating an Online Training Program on Shared Decision-making About Screening for Down Syndrome), which is not on this map. Cited by 14 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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.

NCT04162288 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

RCT Protocol for Evaluating an Online Training Program on Shared Decision-making About Screening for Down Syndrome

TypeinterventionalSponsorCHU de Quebec-Universite LavalRan2019 to 2020Enrolled36ConditionsShared Decision MakingArmsOnline Training - Shared Decision Making in Prenatal Screening, Online Training - Online Training on Prenatal Screening
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Health Literacy in Pregnant Women: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

11 authors.

Agathe DelanoëPopulations Health and Optimal Health Practices Research Group, CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec City, QC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-9374-8904
Johanie LépinePopulations Health and Optimal Health Practices Research Group, CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec City, QC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-8358-1362
Stéphane TurcottePopulations Health and Optimal Health Practices Research Group, CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec City, QC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-4528-1315
Maria Esther Leiva PortocarreroPopulations Health and Optimal Health Practices Research Group, CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec City, QC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-9607-9117
Hubert RobitaillePopulations Health and Optimal Health Practices Research Group, CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec City, QC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-5817-5602
Anik Mc GiguèrePopulations Health and Optimal Health Practices Research Group, CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec City, QC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-9928-7395
Brenda J WilsonSchool of Epidemiology, Public Health and Preventive Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-2145-5154
Holly O WittemanPopulations Health and Optimal Health Practices Research Group, CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec City, QC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-4192-0682
Isabelle LévesqueDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Université Laval, Quebec City, QC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-3436-2803
Laurence GuillaumiePopulations Health and Optimal Health Practices Research Group, CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec City, QC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-1138-8285
France LégaréPopulations Health and Optimal Health Practices Research Group, CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec City, QC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-2296-6696

Funding

Canadian Institutes of Health Research
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDeciding about undergoing prenatal screening is difficult, as it entails risks, potential loss and regrets, and challenges to personal values. Shared decision making and decision aids (DAs) can help pregnant women give informed and values-based consent or refusal to prenatal screening, but little is known about factors influencing the use of DAs.

objectiveThe objective of this study was to identify the influence of psychosocial factors on pregnant women's intention to use a DA for prenatal screening for Down syndrome (DS). We also added health literacy variables to explore their influence on pregnant women's intention.

methodsWe conducted a survey of pregnant women in the province of Quebec (Canada) using a Web panel. Eligibility criteria included age >18 years, >16 weeks pregnant, low-risk pregnancy, and having decided about prenatal screening for the current pregnancy. We collected data based on an extended version of the Theory of Planned Behavior assessing 7 psychosocial constructs (intention, attitude, anticipated regret, subjective norm, descriptive norm, moral norm, and perceived control), 3 related sets of beliefs (behavioral, normative, and control beliefs), 4 health literacy variables, and sociodemographics. Eligible women watched a video depicting the behavior of interest before completing a Web-based questionnaire. We performed descriptive, bivariate, and ordinal logistic regression analyses.

resultsOf the 383 eligible pregnant women who agreed to participate, 350 pregnant women completed the Web-based questionnaire and 346 were retained for analysis (completion rate 350/383, 91.4%; mean age 30.1, SD 4.3, years). In order of importance, factors influencing intention to use a DA for prenatal screening for DS were attitude (odds ratio, OR, 9.16, 95% CI 4.02-20.85), moral norm (OR 7.97, 95% CI 4.49-14.14), descriptive norm (OR 2.83, 95% CI 1.63-4.92), and anticipated regret (OR 2.43, 95% CI 1.71-3.46). Specific attitudinal beliefs significantly related to intention were that using a DA would reassure them (OR 2.55, 95% CI 1.73-4.01), facilitate their reflections with their spouse (OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.05-2.29), and let them know about the advantages of doing or not doing the test (OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.05-2.24). Health literacy did not add to the predictive power of our model (P values range .43-.92).

conclusionsImplementation interventions targeting the use of a DA for prenatal screening for DS by pregnant women should address a number of modifiable factors, especially by introducing the advantages of using the DA (attitude), informing pregnant women that they might regret not using it (anticipated regret), and presenting the use of DAs as a common practice (descriptive norm). However, interventions on moral norms related to the use of DA should be treated with caution. Further studies that include populations with low health literacy are needed before decisive claims can be made.

Indexed as

Decision Support TechniquesAdultDown SyndromeFemaleHealth LiteracyHumansIntentionMass ScreeningPregnancyPrenatal DiagnosisPsychologySurveys and Questionnairesbehaviordecision aidsdecision makinghealth literacyintentionprenatal diagnosis

Identifiers

PMID27793792
PMCPMC5106559

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.