Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34761374›Full record

ArticleActa obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica2022

The importance of information and support following a suspected second-trimester anomaly that is later discarded: A qualitative study of women's experiences.

Lina Thirup, Puk Sandager, Ida Vogel, Stina Lou

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 36% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Lina ThirupDEFACTUM-Public Health & Health Services Research, Central Denmark Region, Aarhus, Denmark.
Puk SandagerCenter for Fetal Diagnostics, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Ida VogelCenter for Fetal Diagnostics, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Stina LouDEFACTUM-Public Health & Health Services Research, Central Denmark Region, Aarhus, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6177-5780
Aarhus University · DKAarhus University Hospital · DK

Funding

Novo Nordisk Fonden NNF16OC0018722
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionA second-trimester anatomy scan may identify a suspected minor fetal anomaly and/or "soft marker," such as choroid plexus cysts or femoral shortening. Such findings can raise a medical concern, as they could indicate severe fetal disease; however, they are also often transient or a "false alarm." The aim of this study was to explore the experiences of pregnant women, where a medical concern was raised at the second-trimester ultrasound scan and later discarded after follow-up examinations and diagnostic testing. MATERIAL AND

methodsThis study consists of qualitative, in-depth interviews with nine women, where a minor anomaly/soft marker was identified at the second-trimester scan and a severe anomaly was later ruled out. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis.

resultsThe main source of worry was uncertainty about the possible implications for the pregnancy and the baby, particularly concerns about potential termination of pregnancy for a severe fetal condition. The women described four strategies to manage worry and uncertainty during the diagnostic process: (a) seeking additional information to feel more in control, and (b) using social networks to share their concerns. Some women tried to (c) mentally distance themselves from the pregnancy during the diagnostic period, while (d) extra scans could relieve worry and support attachment. The women appreciated when the fetal medicine specialist pointed to normal features in the pregnancy and the baby, as this provided some counterbalance to the sense of uncertainty. In general, the women expressed satisfaction with the information received during the diagnostic process. However, all of them were worried during the diagnostic process, and where this process was prolonged, such worry lingered even after the minor anomaly/soft marker had been discarded.

conclusionsDiagnostic uncertainty cannot be avoided in obstetric ultrasound and the women concerned appreciated being informed about the suspected findings even if it caused increased worry. Expedient diagnostic processes may alleviate worry, but are not always possible. Women in a prolonged diagnostic process may benefit from psychological and social support in parallel with, and even beyond, the obstetric investigation. However, further research is warranted.

Indexed as

Ultrasonography, PrenatalAdultAnxietyDenmarkFalse Positive ReactionsFemaleFetal DiseasesHumansInterviews as TopicPregnancyPregnancy ComplicationsPregnancy Trimester, SecondYoung Adultpregnancyprenatal carequalitative researchultrasounduncertainty

Identifiers

PMID34761374
PMCPMC9564444
OpenAlexW3214606473

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.