Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32638447›Full record

ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2021

Parental experiences of uncertainty following an abnormal fetal anomaly scan: Insights using Han's taxonomy of uncertainty.

Jennifer Hammond, Jasmijn E Klapwijk, Melissa Hill, Stina Lou, Kelly E Ormond, Karin E M Diderich, Sam Riedijk, Celine Lewis

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
6.5field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Hope pluralism in antenatal palliative care.Journal of medical ethics · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Jennifer HammondNorth Thames Genomic Laboratory Hub, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2637-5818
Jasmijn E KlapwijkDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Melissa HillNorth Thames Genomic Laboratory Hub, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3900-1425
Stina LouCenter for Fetal Diagnostics, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0001-6177-5780
Kelly E OrmondDepartment of Genetics and Stanford Center for Biomedical Ethics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1033-0818
Karin E M DiderichDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Sam RiedijkDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Celine LewisNorth Thames Genomic Laboratory Hub, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7169-1521
Erasmus MC · NLGreat Ormond Street Hospital · GBAarhus University Hospital · DKStanford University · US

Funding

Department of HealthWellcome TrustWellcome Trust 211288/Z/18/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

For a number of prospective parents, uncertainty during pregnancy starts when an anomaly is found during a routine fetal anomaly scan. This may be followed by numerous tests to determine the etiology and nature of the anomaly. In this study, we aimed to understand how prospective parents perceive and manage uncertainty after being confronted with a structural anomaly during their routine ultrasound. Han's taxonomy of uncertainty was used as a framework to identify and understand the different types of uncertainty experienced. Interviews were held in the UK (n = 8 women and n = 1 male partner) and in the Netherlands (n = 7 women) with participants who had experienced uncertainty in their pregnancy after a fetal scan. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis, and the uncertainties experienced by parents were mapped against the dimensions of the Han taxonomy (sources, issues, and locus). Participants' experience of uncertainty was relevant to all dimensions and subcategories of the Han taxonomy, showing its applicability in the prenatal setting. Sources of uncertainty included receiving probabilistic or ambiguous information about the anomaly, or information that was complex and challenging to understand. Issues of uncertainty included were those that were scientific-such as a probable diagnosis with no further information, personal-such as the emotional impact of uncertainty, and practical-such as limited information about medical procedures and practical aspects of care. Additionally, participants described what helped them to manage uncertainty. This included active coping strategies such as searching for information on the Internet, external coping resources such as seeking social support, and internal coping resources such as using positivity and hope. Several recommendations for the healthcare professional to minimize uncertainty and help the patient deal with uncertainty have been proposed based on these findings.

Indexed as

Adaptation, PsychologicalParentsFemaleHumansMalePregnancyPrenatal CareProspective StudiesUncertaintycommunicationfetal anomalyparentsprenatal diagnosisuncertainty

Identifiers

PMID32638447
PMCPMC8432163
OpenAlexW3041543336

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.