ArticleThe Journal of pediatrics2018
An Assessment of Public Preferences for Newborn Screening Using Best-Worst Scaling.
Article in The Journal of pediatrics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Preferences for aspects of antenatal and newborn screening: a systematic review.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2019Pooled it
- Perception of genomic newborn screening among peripartum mothers.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2024Article
- Advocacy in neonatology: current issues and introduction to the series.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2023Review
- Diagnostic experiences of Duchenne families and their preferences for newborn screening: A mixed-methods study.American journal of medical genetics. Part C, Seminars in medical genetics · 2022Article
- Article
- The Value of Cognitive Pretesting: Improving Validity and Revealing Blind Spots through the Development of a Newborn Screening Parent Experiences Survey.International journal of neonatal screening · 2021Article
- Knowledge, Beliefs, and Attitudes Concerning Genetic Testing Among Young Jordanians.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2019Article
- The Complexities of Ascertaining Public Preferences for Newborn Screening Policies.The Journal of pediatrics · 2018Article
- Understanding the Impact of Different Modes of Information Provision on Preferences for a Newborn Bloodspot Screening Program in the United Kingdom.MDM policy & practiceArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo identify and quantify public preferences for attributes of newborn screening conditions. STUDY
designWe conducted an online national survey of the public (n = 502) to evaluate preferences for attributes of candidate newborn screening conditions. Respondents were presented with hypothetical condition profiles that were defined using 10 attributes with 2-6 levels per attribute. Participants indicated whether they would recommend screening for a condition and which condition attributes were most and least important when making this decision (best-worst scaling). Difference scores were calculated and stratified by condition recommendation (recommend or not recommend for screening). Regression analyses were used to evaluate the effect of attributes on choice to screen or not screen.
resultsThe number of babies diagnosed was important to those who would recommend newborn screening for a profile, and age at which the treatment would start was important to those who would not recommend newborn screening. Cost was considered to be a key attribute, and treatment effectiveness and impact of making the diagnosis through newborn screening were of low importance for both groups.
conclusionPublic preferences identified through survey methods that provide an adequate baseline understanding of newborn screening can be used to inform newborn screening decisions.
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.