ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2022
Knowledge, attitudes and preferences regarding reproductive genetic carrier screening among reproductive-aged men and women in Flanders (Belgium).
Article in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Scoping review and recommendations for development and delivery of education resources for reproductive genetic carrier screening.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Review
- Levers and constraints on general practitioners offering and managing reproductive genetic carrier screening in Australian primary care: a rich graphic of the complex context.BMC medical genomics · 2026Article
- Knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions towards premarital screening among undergraduate university students in Chattogram district, Bangladesh: a cross-sectional study.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Patient and health care practitioner experiences and perspectives on expanded carrier screening: A scoping review.Genetics in medicine open · 2026Review
- Expanding carrier screening: beyond the genes, to include underrepresented ancestries.NPJ genomic medicine · 2025Article
- How women respond to uncertainty in the context of genetic screening: A qualitative analysis framed by the uncertainty tolerance model.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Article
- Congenital glaucoma prevention program-Evaluation of patient knowledge and acceptance of genetic screening.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Article
- Prospective parents' views on reproductive genetic carrier screening: "You know better, you do better".Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Article
- Educational tools support informed decision-making for genetic carrier screening in a heterogenic Israeli population.Journal of community genetics · 2024Article
- Experiences of nonpregnant couples after receiving reproductive genetic carrier screening results in Belgium.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2023Article
- Genetic Counselling Needs for Reproductive Genetic Carrier Screening: A Scoping Review.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Through carrier screening couples at-risk of conceiving a child with an autosomal recessive or X-linked condition can be identified prior to conception. The aim of this study was to assess knowledge, attitudes and preferences regarding reproductive genetic carrier screening (RGCS) among reproductive-aged men and women in Flanders (Belgium). Women and men of reproductive age visiting their pharmacist were invited to answer a self-administered questionnaire. Prior to filling in the questionnaire, participants were asked to read an information leaflet explaining some key concepts about RGCS. Our sample included 387 individuals of reproductive age, of which 68.5% were female and 31.5% were male. Most of the participants were below 34 years old (72.9%), didn't have children (68.6%) and were currently in a relationship (69.1%). Offering RGCS to couples that want to have children was found acceptable by 86% of participants. However, fewer participants would consider RGCS for themselves in the future (61%). We observed a positive correlation between attitude score/knowledge score and the intention to have RGCS. Half of the participants (50.9%) preferred the disclosure of individual test results. Most of participants indicated that RGCS should be offered through the gynecologist (81.1%), followed by the GP (71.5%) and the Centre for Human Genetics (64.8%). About 68.9% of participants were willing to pay out-of-pocket for an RGCS test. We recommend that RGCS should ideally be implemented through a tailored implementation strategy whereby individual needs and preferences can be taken into account.
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.