Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28674770›Full record

ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2018

Choosing between Higher and Lower Resolution Microarrays: do Pregnant Women Have Sufficient Knowledge to Make Informed Choices Consistent with their Attitude?

S L van der Steen, E M Bunnik, M G Polak, K E M Diderich, J Verhagen-Visser, L C P Govaerts, M Joosten, M F C M Knapen, A T J I Go, D Van Opstal and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2018. 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
–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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  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

14 authors.

S L van der SteenDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. s.vandersteen@erasmusmc.nl.
E M BunnikDepartment of Medical Ethics & Philosophy of Medicine, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
M G PolakInstitute of Psychology, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
K E M DiderichDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
J Verhagen-VisserDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
L C P GovaertsDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
M JoostenDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
M F C M KnapenDepartment of Obstetrics and Prenatal Medicine, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
A T J I GoDepartment of Obstetrics and Prenatal Medicine, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
D Van OpstalDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
M I SrebniakDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
R J H GaljaardDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
A TibbenDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.
S R RiedijkDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Developments in prenatal testing allow the detection of more findings. SNP arrays in prenatal diagnosis (PND) can be analyzed at 0.5 Mb resolution detecting more clinically relevant anomalies, or at 5 Mb resolution. We investigated whether women had sufficient knowledge to make informed choices regarding the scope of their prenatal test that were consistent with their attitude. Pregnant women could choose between testing at 5 or at 0.5 Mb array. Consenting women (N = 69) received pre-test genetic counseling by phone and filled out the Measure of Informed Choice questionnaire designed for this study. Choices based on sufficient knowledge and consistent with attitude were considered informed. Sixty-two percent of the women made an adequately informed choice, based on sufficient knowledge and attitude-consistent with their choice of microarray resolution. Women who made an informed choice, opted for 0.5 Mb array resolution more often. There were no differences between women making adequately informed or less informed choices regarding level of experienced anxiety or doubts. Over time on T0 and T1, anxiety and doubts significantly decreased. While previous studies demonstrated that knowledge is an important component in informed decision-making, this study underlines that a consistent attitude might be equally important for decision-making. We advocate more focus on attitude-consistency and deliberation as compared to only a strong focus on knowledge.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeMicroarray AnalysisAdultAnxietyDecision MakingFemaleGenetic CounselingGenetic TestingHumansInformed ConsentPregnancyPrenatal DiagnosisSurveys and QuestionnairesChromosomal microarrayPrenatal diagnosisPrenatal genetic counseling

Identifiers

PMID28674770
PMCPMC5794816

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.