Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30761454›Full record

ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2019

Expanded genetic carrier screening in clinical practice: a current survey of patient impressions and attitudes.

Nigel Pereira, Michelle Wood, Emerly Luong, Allison Briggs, Michael Galloway, Rose A Maxwell, Steven R Lindheim

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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 3 institutions in 1 country.

Nigel PereiraThe Ronald O. Perelman and Claudia Cohen Center for Reproductive Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8160-5869
Michelle WoodDepartment of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Emerly LuongDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Boonshoft School of Medicine, Wright State University, 128 Apple Street, Suite 3800 Weber CHE, Dayton, OH, 45409, USA.
Allison BriggsDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Boonshoft School of Medicine, Wright State University, 128 Apple Street, Suite 3800 Weber CHE, Dayton, OH, 45409, USA.
Michael GallowayDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Boonshoft School of Medicine, Wright State University, 128 Apple Street, Suite 3800 Weber CHE, Dayton, OH, 45409, USA.
Rose A MaxwellDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Boonshoft School of Medicine, Wright State University, 128 Apple Street, Suite 3800 Weber CHE, Dayton, OH, 45409, USA.
Steven R LindheimDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Boonshoft School of Medicine, Wright State University, 128 Apple Street, Suite 3800 Weber CHE, Dayton, OH, 45409, USA. steven.lindheim@wright.edu.
Wright State University · USCornell University · USUniversity of California, San Francisco · US

Funding

Progenity Steven R. Lindheim, MD, MMM received a grant from Progenity?, San Diego, CA. Study funded by Progenity?, unrestricted research grant. There was no involvement by Progenity in writing this manuscript. The remaining authors report no conflict of interest.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeExpanded genetic carrier screening (ECS) is an important part of gynecological practice and preconception planning. We evaluated the awareness and attitudes among women regarding ECS and factors that may influence decision-making in a family planning context.

methodsA 32-question survey in an academic university practice was given to 521 women who were either currently pregnant (n = 108), undergoing gynecologic care who were considering future fertility (n = 308), and considering or receiving fertility treatment (n = 105). Data are reported descriptively.

resultsForty-seven percent (n = 246) of patients were aware of ECS. Though most reported feeling positive or neutral towards ECS, 51% (n = 263) reported no desire for testing. Fifty-eight percent (n = 303) felt it beneficial to know their carrier status, and 55% (n = 257) said it was their responsibility to undergo testing. Those considering future fertility were found to have a more positive attitude towards ECS (51.4%) than those considering or receiving fertility treatment (34%). For positive carriers of a genetic disorder, 228 (49%) of patients would proceed with having their partner screened, 58 (13%) would undergo prenatal screening only and 12 (2.6%) would continue with vitro fertilization (IVF). Related to cost for ECS, 53.5% (n = 191) would be willing to pay at least $50-100 for testing, while 29% (n = 146) would not pay anything out of pocket.

conclusionsDespite patients' beliefs that it would be beneficial and their responsibility to undergo carrier status testing, the majority reported no desire for ECS and many were unwilling to pay out of pocket. Further education is necessary to reconcile the gap between technology and patient decision-making.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultDecision MakingFemaleFertilization in VitroGenetic Carrier ScreeningGenetic CounselingHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHeterozygoteHumansInfertilityMalePhysiciansPregnancyPrenatal DiagnosisProspective StudiesCarrier screeningExpanded carrier screeningGenetic screeningPatient perceptionsReproductive genetics

Identifiers

PMID30761454
PMCPMC6505014
OpenAlexW2912614041

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.