Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31508239›Full record

ArticlePilot and feasibility studies2019

Rethinking Strategies for Positive Newborn Screening Result (NBS+) Delivery (ReSPoND): a process evaluation of co-designing interventions to minimise impact on parental emotional well-being and stress.

Jane Chudleigh, Jim Bonham, Mandy Bryon, Jill Francis, Louise Moody, Steve Morris, Alan Simpson, Fiona Ulph, Kevin Southern

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pilot and feasibility studies, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

9 authors.

Jane Chudleigh1Centre for Maternal and Child Health Research, City, University of London, London, EC1V 0HB UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7334-8708
Jim Bonham2Division of Pharmacy, Diagnostics and Genetics Sheffield Children's NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, S10 2TH UK.
Mandy Bryon3Paediatric Psychology and Play Services, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, WC1N 3JH UK.
Jill Francis4Division of Health Services Research and Management, City, University of London, London, EC1V 0HB UK.
Louise Moody5School of Art and Design, Coventry University, Coventry, CV1 5FB UK.
Steve Morris6Centre of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, WC1E 6BT UK.
Alan Simpson7Centre for Mental Health Research, City, University of London, London, EC1V 0HB UK.
Fiona Ulph8Division of Psychology and Mental Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL UK.
Kevin Southern9Women's and Children's Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, L69 3BX UK.

Funding

Department of Health 16/52/25Department of Health HS&DR/16/52/25
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNewborn blood spot (NBS) screening seeks to prevent ill health, disability and death through early diagnosis and effective intervention. Each year, around 10,000 parents of babies born in England are given a positive NBS result indicating their child may be affected or carriers of one of the nine conditions currently screened for. Despite guidance, these results are inconsistently delivered to parents across geographical regions. There is evidence that many parents are dissatisfied with how NBS results are communicated to them and that poor communication practices can lead to various negative sequelae. The purpose of this study is to co-design, implement and undertake a process evaluation of new, co-designed interventions to improve delivery of initial positive NBS results to parents.

methodsThis mixed-methods study will use four phases with defined outputs. Family Systems Theory will form the theoretical basis for the study. The principles and methods of experience-based co-design will underpin intervention development. Normalisation Process Theory will underpin the process evaluation of the interventions co-designed to improve the delivery of positive NBS results to parents. An economic analysis will determine resource use and costs of current practice and of implementing the new co-designed interventions. The nominal group technique will be used to inform the selection of suitable outcome measures for a future evaluation study. DISCUSSION: The main output of the proposed study will be co-designed interventions for initial communication of positive NBS results to parents ready to be evaluated in a definitive evaluation study.The interventions, co-designed with parents, will help to minimise potential negative sequelae associated with poor communication practices by considering parental and staff experiences as well as healthcare challenges such as finite resources. In addition, information about indicative costs associated with different communication strategies will be determined.It is anticipated it may also be possible to extrapolate principles of good communication practices from the present study for the delivery of bad news to parents for children newly diagnosed with other conditions including cancer and other chronic conditions such as diabetes or epilepsy.

trial registrationISRCTN 15330120 date of registration 17/01/2018.

Indexed as

Congenital hypothyroidCystic fibrosisMetabolicNewborn bloodspot screeningSickle cell disease

Identifiers

PMID31508239
PMCPMC6724281

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.