Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30269633›Full record

ArticleThe journal of maternal-fetal & neonatal medicine : the official journal of the European Association of Perinatal Medicine, the Federation of Asia and Oceania Perinatal Societies, the International Society of Perinatal Obstetricians2020

Decisional regret in women receiving high risk or inconclusive prenatal cell-free DNA screening results.

Betsy L Gammon, Carolina Jaramillo, Kirsten A Riggan, Megan Allyse

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The journal of maternal-fetal & neonatal medicine : the official journal of the European Association of Perinatal Medicine, the Federation of Asia and Oceania Perinatal Societies, the International Society of Perinatal Obstetricians, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

4 authors.

Betsy L GammonMayo Clinic, Biomedical Ethics Program, Rochester, MN, USA.
Carolina JaramilloMayo Clinic, Biomedical Ethics Program, Rochester, MN, USA.
Kirsten A RigganMayo Clinic, Biomedical Ethics Program, Rochester, MN, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0127-9555
Megan AllyseMayo Clinic, Biomedical Ethics Program, Rochester, MN, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6136-9256

Funding

Factors Influencing Access and Utilization of Genetic Prenatal Care Services Among Women from Underserved PopulationsK01HG009542 · NHGRI · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI ALLYSE, MEGAN A. · 2018 to 2022
$809k
NHGRI NIH HHS K01 HG009542
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as

Choice BehaviorNoninvasive Prenatal TestingAdultEmotionsFemaleGenetic CounselingHumansPredictive Value of TestsPregnancyQualitative ResearchHigh-riskinconclusivenoninvasive prenatal testingpretest counseling

Identifiers

PMID30269633
PMCPMC10694839

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.