Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29525932›Full record

ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2018

Attitudes Toward and Uptake of Prenatal Genetic Screening and Testing in Twin Pregnancies.

Kathryn M Reese, Jennifer Czerwinski, Sandra Darilek, Anthony Johnson, Malorie Jones, Claire N Singletary

Abstract 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. Cited by 7 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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.

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, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  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

6 authors.

Kathryn M ReeseGenetic Counseling Program, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center UTHealth Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, 6431 Fannin Street, MSB 3.142, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5662-7270
Jennifer CzerwinskiGenetic Counseling Program, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center UTHealth Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, 6431 Fannin Street, MSB 3.142, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
Sandra DarilekDepartment of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.
Anthony JohnsonDepartment of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, McGovern Medical School at UTHealth, Houston, TX, USA.
Malorie JonesGenetic Counseling Program, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center UTHealth Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, 6431 Fannin Street, MSB 3.142, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
Claire N SingletaryGenetic Counseling Program, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center UTHealth Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, 6431 Fannin Street, MSB 3.142, Houston, TX, 77030, USA. Claire.N.Singletary@uth.tmc.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The rate of twinning is rising and since the introduction of non-invasive prenatal testing, interest in and uptake of genetic screening and testing in twin pregnancies has not been investigated. This study aimed to explore the attitudes toward and uptake of current prenatal genetic screening and diagnostic testing options for fetal aneuploidy in twin pregnancies. Women being seen for genetic counseling with twin gestations were recruited for participation in a descriptive study with questionnaire (n = 42) and semi-structured phone interview (n = 15). Women were significantly more in favor of screening than diagnostic testing (p = 0.049). Sixty-nine (n = 25) percent elected screening, while one participant had a diagnostic procedure. Women were interested in screening for preparation or reassurance despite having concerns about accuracy and uncertainty. Most women (86%) felt they would make the same decision in a singleton pregnancy. Despite this, 48% cited twin pregnancy as influential to some degree. Information learned from providers, past experiences, and family and friends were also cited as influencing and anchoring factors, suggesting that tailoring prenatal genetic counseling sessions for twins might parallel that of singletons. No significant differences between natural and assisted conception patients were found. Although it did not alter patient decisions, genetic counseling was used as a platform to raise concerns and gather information.

Indexed as

Attitude to HealthGenetic CounselingGenetic TestingPregnancy, TwinAdultAneuploidyFemaleHumansPregnancyPrenatal DiagnosisAttitudesPrenatal genetic counselingPrenatal genetic testingTwin pregnanciesUptake

Identifiers

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.