Trial reportSocial science & medicine (1982)2021
A behavior-theoretic evaluation of values clarification on parental beliefs and intentions toward genomic sequencing for newborns.
Trial report in Social science & medicine (1982), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 4 of them syntheses 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Online education for rare genetic diseases: a systematic review.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2025Pooled it
- Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Clarifying Values: An Updated and Expanded Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2021Pooled it
- Principles of Genomic Newborn Screening Programs: A Systematic Review.JAMA network open · 2021Pooled it
- The impact of the number of tests presented and a provider recommendation on decisions about genetic testing for cancer risk.Patient education and counseling · 2021Trial
- Values clarification and parental decision making about newborn genomic sequencing.Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association · 2020Trial
- Parental reactions to and preferences for genomic newborn screening in Germany: findings from a scenario-based survey experiment.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- Public and parent perspectives on genomic sequencing in newborn screening: a scoping review.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Review
- A population-representative survey on attitudes toward genomic newborn screening in Germany.Genetics in medicine open · 2026Article
- Public preferences for the value and implementation of genomic newborn screening: Insights from two discrete choice experiments in Australia.American journal of human genetics · 2025Article
- Key informant perspectives on implementing genomic newborn screening: a qualitative study guided by the Action, Actor, Context, Target, Time framework.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2024Article
- Australian Public Perspectives on Genomic Newborn Screening: Risks, Benefits, and Preferences for Implementation.International journal of neonatal screening · 2024Article
- Parental Guidance Suggested: Engaging Parents as Partners in Research Studies of Genomic Screening for a Pediatric Population.Frontiers in genetics · 2022Article
- Social and behavioral science at the forefront of genomics: Discovery, translation, and health equity.Social science & medicine (1982) · 2021Article
- Genomic Sequencing for Newborn Screening: Results of the NC NEXUS Project.American journal of human genetics · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Decision aids commonly include values clarification exercises to help people consider which aspects of a choice matter most to them, and to help them make decisions that are congruent with their personal values and preferences. Using a randomized online experiment, we examined the influence of values clarification on parental beliefs and intentions about having genomic sequencing for newborns. We recruited 1186 women and men ages 18-44 who were pregnant or whose partner was pregnant or planning to become pregnant in the next two years. Participants (N = 1000) completed one of two versions of an online decision aid developed as part of a larger project examining the technical, clinical, and social aspects of using exome sequencing to screen newborns for rare genetic conditions. The education-only version provided information about using genomic sequencing to screen newborns for medically treatable conditions. The education-plus-values-clarification version included the same information, along with a values clarification exercise in which participants classified as important or unimportant five reasons in support of having and five reasons against having their newborn undergo genomic sequencing. We conducted partial correlations, regression analysis, and MANCOVAs with sex, health literacy, and experience with genetic testing as covariates. Participants who completed the decision aid with the values clarification exercise agreed less strongly with four of the five statements against sequencing compared to participants who viewed the education-only decision aid. The groups did not differ on agreement with reasons in support of sequencing. Agreement with four of five reasons against genomic sequencing was negatively associated with intentions to have their newborn sequenced, whereas agreement with all five reasons in support of sequencing were positively associated with intentions.
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.