ArticlePatient education and counseling2021
Development and testing of a self-report measure of preparing to parent in the context of a fetal anomaly diagnosis.
Article in Patient education and counseling, 2021. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Voices of parents of children with major congenital anomalies admitted to the NICU: initial diagnosis, hospitalization, and discharge home.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2025Article
- Article
- An mHealth, patient engagement approach to understand and address parents' mental health and caregiving needs after prenatal diagnosis of critical congenital heart disease.PEC innovation · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo generate a self-report instrument to capture clinically relevant variations in expectant parents' caregiving development, specified by how they are preparing to parent an infant with a major congenital anomaly.
methodsRecent literature structured domains to guide item generation. Evaluations by experts and expectant parents led to a refined instrument for field testing. Psychometric testing included exploratory factor analysis, internal consistency, and test-retest reliability.
resultsSamples included expert evaluators (n = 9), and expectant parent evaluators (n = 20) and expectant mother field testers (n = 67) with fetal anomaly diagnoses. Preparing to Parent-Act, Relate, Engage (PreP-ARE) resulted from a three factor solution that explained 71.8 % of the total variance, with global Cronbach's α = 0.72, and sub-scales 0.81, 0.65, 0.72 respectively. Cohen's weighted kappa indicated all items were acceptably reliable, with 14 of 19 items showing moderate (≥ 0.41) or good (≥ 0.61) reliability. Convergent validity was found between the maternal antenatal attachment and Act scales (r = 0.39, p = 0.001).
conclusionThis empirically-based instrument was demonstrated to be valid and reliable, and has potential for studying this transitional time. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: PreP-ARE could be used to understand patient responses to the diagnosis, level of engagement, readiness to make decisions, and ability to form collaborative partnerships to manage healthcare.
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.