Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29720125›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2018

Facilitating autonomous, confident and satisfying choices: a mixed-method study of women's choice-making in prenatal screening for common aneuploidies.

An Chen, Henni Tenhunen, Paulus Torkki, Antti Peltokorpi, Seppo Heinonen, Paul Lillrank, Vedran Stefanovic

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

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

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

An ChenInstitute of Healthcare Engineering, Management and Architecture (HEMA), Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, Aalto University, Maarintie 8, P.O. Box 15500, 00076, Espoo, Finland. an.chen@aalto.fi.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9419-8254
Henni TenhunenInstitute of Healthcare Engineering, Management and Architecture (HEMA), Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, Aalto University, Maarintie 8, P.O. Box 15500, 00076, Espoo, Finland.
Paulus TorkkiInstitute of Healthcare Engineering, Management and Architecture (HEMA), Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, Aalto University, Maarintie 8, P.O. Box 15500, 00076, Espoo, Finland.
Antti PeltokorpiDepartment of Civil Engineering, Aalto University, Rakentajanaukio 4, 02150, Espoo, Finland.
Seppo HeinonenDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Haartmaninkatu 2, 00290, Helsinki, Finland.
Paul LillrankInstitute of Healthcare Engineering, Management and Architecture (HEMA), Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, Aalto University, Maarintie 8, P.O. Box 15500, 00076, Espoo, Finland.
Vedran StefanovicDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Haartmaninkatu 2, 00290, Helsinki, Finland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPopulation-based prenatal screening has become a common and widely available obstetrical practice in majority of developed countries. Under the patient autonomy principle, women should understand the screening options, be able to take their personal preferences and situations into account, and be encouraged to make autonomous and intentional decisions. The majority of the current research focuses on the prenatal screening uptake rate, women's choice on screening tests, and the influential factors. However, little attention has been paid to women's choice-making processes and experiences in prenatal screening and their influences on choice satisfaction. Understanding women's choice-making processes and experiences in pregnancy and childbirth is the prerequisite for designing women-centered choice aids and delivering women-centered maternity care. This paper presents a pilot study that aims to investigate women's experiences when they make choices for screening tests, quantify the choice-making experience, and identify the experiential factors that affect women's satisfaction on choices they made.

methodWe conducted a mixed-method research at Helsinki and Uusimaa Hospital District (HUS) in Finland. First, the women's choice-making experiences were explored by semi-structured interviews. We interviewed 28 women who participated in prenatal screening. The interview data was processed by thematic analysis. Then, a cross-sectional self-completion survey was designed and implemented, assessing women's experiences in choice-making and identifying the experiential factors that influence choice satisfaction. Of 940 distributed questionnaires, 185 responses were received. Multivariable linear regression analysis was used to detect the effects of the variables.

resultsWe developed a set of measurements for women's choice-making experiences in prenatal screening with seven variables: activeness, informedness, confidence, social pressure, difficulty, positive emotion and negative emotion. Regression revealed that activeness in choice-making (β = 0.176; p = 0.023), confidence in choice-making (β = 0.388; p < 0.001), perceived social pressure (β = - 0.306; p < 0.001) and perceived difficulty (β = - 0.274; p < 0.001) significantly influenced women's choice satisfaction in prenatal screening.

conclusionsThis study explores the experiential dimension of women's choice-making in prenatal screening. Our result will be useful for service providers to design women-centered choice environment. Women's willingness and capabilities of making active choices, their preferences, and social reliance should be well considered in order to facilitate autonomous, confident and satisfying choices.

Indexed as

Choice BehaviorAdultAneuploidyCross-Sectional StudiesEmotionsFemaleFetal DiseasesGenetic TestingHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansInterviews as TopicPatient Acceptance of Health CarePatient SatisfactionPersonal AutonomyPilot ProjectsPregnancyChoice-making experienceChoice satisfactionPrenatal screeningWomen’s choice

Identifiers

PMID29720125
PMCPMC5930782

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.