Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29687313›Full record

ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2018

Genetic Counselors' Experience with and Opinions on the Management of Newborn Screening Incidental Carrier Findings.

Kristen Leppert, Katharine Bisordi, Jessica Nieto, Kristin Maloney, Yue Guan, Shannan Dixon, Alena Egense

Open access · hybridAbstract 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 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kristen LeppertUniversity of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, 21201, USA. kleppert@jhmi.edu.
Katharine BisordiUniversity of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, 21201, USA.
Jessica NietoGeneDx, Gaithersburg, MD, USA.
Kristin MaloneyUniversity of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, 21201, USA.
Yue GuanUniversity of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, 21201, USA.
Shannan DixonUniversity of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, 21201, USA.
Alena EgenseUniversity of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, 21201, USA.
University of Maryland, Baltimore · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Newborn screening (NBS) is a public health program whose aim is to identify infants who will be clinically affected with a serious metabolic, genetic, or endocrine disorder; however, the technology utilized by many NBS programs also detects infants who are heterozygous carriers for autosomal recessive conditions. Discussion surrounding disclosure of these incidental carrier findings remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to assess genetic counselors' attitudes about disclosure of carrier status results generated by NBS and to gather data on their experiences with incidental carrier findings. An electronic survey was distributed to genetic counselors of all specialties via the NSGC listserv, and a total of 235 survey responses were analyzed. Quantitative data were analyzed using IBM SPSS v24, and qualitative data were manually analyzed for thematic analysis. Results show that the counselor participants were overall in favor of routine disclosure. Those with experience in NBS were much more likely to strongly agree with one or more reasons for disclosure (p < 0.001), whereas those with five or fewer years of experience were more likely to strongly agree with one or more reasons for non-disclosure (p = 0.031). Qualitative analysis identified key motivating factors for disclosure, including helping parents to understand a positive screen, parents may otherwise be unaware of reproductive risk and they may not otherwise have access to this information, and, while genetic testing is inherently a complex and ambiguous process, this does not justify non-disclosure. The main motivating factor for non-disclosure was the need for better counseling and informed consent. The data suggest that implementation of an "opt-in/out" policy for parents to decide whether or not to receive incidental findings would be beneficial. The results of this study support the continued disclosure of incidental carrier findings; however, additional research is necessary to further determine and implement the most effective disclosure practices.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelCounselorsDisclosureGenetic CounselingGenetic TestingHeterozygoteIncidental FindingsNeonatal ScreeningAdultFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornMaleMiddle AgedCarrier statusGenetic counselorsHeterozygousIncidental findingsNewborn screeningPolicy

Identifiers

PMID29687313
PMCPMC6209045
OpenAlexW2799551462

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.