ArticleAmerican journal on intellectual and developmental disabilities2020
Evaluating the Risks and Benefits of Genetic and Pharmacologic Interventions for Down Syndrome: Views of Parents.
Article in American journal on intellectual and developmental disabilities, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Values of Individuals With Rare Genetic Neurodevelopmental Disorders and Their Family/Caregivers in Healthcare: A Scoping Review to Inform Guideline Development.Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR · 2026Article
- From the lab to the people: major challenges in the biological treatment of Down syndrome.AIMS neuroscience · 2021Review
- "Down Syndrome is Not a Curse": parent Perspectives on the Medicalization of Down Syndrome.AJOB empirical bioethicsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Researchers are investigating new technologies to mitigate or prevent symptoms of Down syndrome (DS), including chromosome silencing and pharmacotherapy. We surveyed parents of individuals with DS to assess their opinions on two hypothetical scenarios describing prenatal chromosome silencing and pediatric pharmacological intervention to improve neurocognition in children with DS. Although a slim majority of participants supported the availability of both therapies, respondent support was contingent on the risks presented, including the risk of miscarriage in the prenatal intervention and the impact of pharmaceuticals on their children's personality. Many parents expressed ambivalence, articulating a desire to improve their children's quality of life but requiring more safety and efficacy research before agreeing to a genetic or pharmacological intervention.
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.