Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29067542›Full record

ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2018

Women's Understanding and Attitudes towards Down Syndrome and Other Genetic Conditions in the Context of Prenatal Screening.

Sarah Long, Peter O'Leary, Roanna Lobo, Jan E Dickinson

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
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. It is linked to trial NCT03825978 (Evaluation of Efficacy of Counseling for Prenatal Screening and Diagnostic Tests on Pregnant Women's Decisional Conflict, Being Sure of the Decision, Anxiety Levels and Attitudes Towards the Tests), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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.

NCT03825978 nacompletednot on this map

Evaluation of Efficacy of Counseling for Prenatal Screening and Diagnostic Tests on Pregnant Women's Decisional Conflict, Being Sure of the Decision, Anxiety Levels and Attitudes Towards the Tests: A Randomised Controlled Clinical Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorSaglik Bilimleri Universitesi Gulhane Tip FakultesiRan2017 to 2018Enrolled260ConditionsDecision Making, Chromosome Abnormality, Anxiety, Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeArmsPrenatal Genetic Counseling
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

4 authors.

Sarah LongGenetic Services of Western Australia, King Edward Memorial Hospital for Women, 374 Bagot Rd, Subiaco, WA, 6008, Australia. Sarah.Long@health.wa.gov.au.ORCID 0000-0002-8187-1726
Peter O'LearyFaculty of Health Sciences, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia.
Roanna LoboSchool of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia.
Jan E DickinsonSchool of Women's and Infants' Health, The University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In order to explore the impact of potential new technologies in the area of prenatal screening, we conducted a baseline study using qualitative interviews to explore women's attitudes and knowledge regarding current and future prenatal screening technology and methods. Three cohorts were interviewed, including healthy women without children, healthy women with healthy children, and healthy women with children who have de novo genetic disorders. This study aimed to assess the baseline understanding and attitudes of women in Western Australia. Women from each cohort demonstrated adequate knowledge of the differences between screening and diagnostic tests, but were mostly unaware of the conditions for which screening is currently available except Down syndrome. Women who had children with de novo genetic conditions were generally aware of more genetic conditions than women with or without healthy children. Most women recognised the genetic basis for the conditions mentioned. Two thirds of women understood that Down syndrome is a chromosomal condition; just one third recognised that the phenotype is variable. Most women expressed a positive attitude towards Down syndrome. Social acceptance of children with Down syndrome was commonly mentioned as a concern. While the majority of women with children supported screening for Down syndrome, they emphasised that it must be an autonomous choice. General knowledge of genetic conditions illustrated that women are exposed to diverse conditions from lived experience as well as the media.

Indexed as

AdultAttitude to HealthDown SyndromeFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansMothersPregnancyUltrasonography, PrenatalWestern AustraliaNIPTPrenatal screeningUnderstanding down syndrome

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.