ArticleEuropean journal of public health2018
Deciding on cystic fibrosis carrier screening: three citizens' juries and an online survey.
Article in European journal of public health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Health technology assessment and ethical issues have to be dealt with in deciding on national carrier screening for cystic fibrosis (CF)-the most frequent severe autosomal recessive disease in Caucasian populations and several stakeholders need to be involved. A citizens' jury is one way to ask citizens to deliberate on controversial topics in the interests of a society. The aims of this project were to gather opinions about CF carrier screening through citizens' jury deliberations and to match them with the findings of a large online consultation survey open to the general population, people with CF and families and health professionals. Methods: Three citizens' juries and an online survey were asked: 'Should the Health Service organize screening of the population with the aim of identifying healthy people who may have children with CF?' The jurors had no medical background and no personal or family CF history. The survey was open to people with CF, families, and healthcare professionals. Results: Jurors and survey respondents were in favour of CF carrier screening, mainly considering the severity of CF, the value of informed reproductive choices and the equality of the screening. All the citizens' juries felt positively about the health service actively offer CF carrier screening to provide women and couples of reproductive age equal access and standardized information on the pros and cons. Conclusion: Considering the favourable attitude towards CF screening, the feasibility of CF screening, in terms of best setting, target age and healthcare professionals providing it, should be tested in a clinical trial.
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.