Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35371863›Full record

ArticleCureus2022

The Cognitive Approach to Bioethical Issues in Perinatal Care in Greece.

Anna Glynou, Elena Frysira, Kalliopi Christakakou-Fotiadi, Makarios Eleftheriadis, Angeliki Sarella, Iosifina Stergiotou, Maria Koukaki, Eirini Chasalevri, Dionysios Galatis, Nicolaos Salakos

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Anna GlynouFourth Department of Nursing/Midwifery, Maternity Hospital Elena Venizelou, Athens, GRC.
Elena FrysiraLaboratory of Medical Genetics, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, GRC.
Kalliopi Christakakou-FotiadiDepartment of Law, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, GRC.
Makarios EleftheriadisSecond Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Aretaieion Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, GRC.
Angeliki SarellaDepartment of Midwifery, Faculty of Health and Caring Sciences, University of West Attica, Athens, GRC.
Iosifina StergiotouDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Fetal Medicine Center, Corfu, GRC.
Maria KoukakiFourth Department of Nursing/Midwifery, Maternity Hospital Elena Venizelou, Athens, GRC.
Eirini ChasalevriDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Maternity Hospital Leto, Athens, GRC.
Dionysios GalatisDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens School of Medicine, Athens, GRC.
Nicolaos SalakosSecond Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Aretaieion Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, GRC.
General-Maternity District Hospital Helena Venizelou · GRFetal Medicine Foundation · GBLETO Maternity Hospital · GRUniversity of West Attica · GR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimCurrent practice in prenatal diagnosis becomes challenging with new bioethics issues emerging constantly during daily clinical routine. Although fetal interventions are driven by a motivation to improve the health of the fetus, progress in fetal therapies raises issues of maternal autonomy. The objective of this article is to assess bioethics in prenatal diagnosis in Greece as well as bioethics education.

methodsThe study was conducted between October 2018 and December 2019. Two hundred and twenty eligible responders were involved in fetal and perinatal medicine in Greece. The questionnaire was developed as a Likert scale. Part 1 covered the participants' general opinion about bioethics. Part 2 covered ethical dilemmas likely to arise when routine screening presents a complicated result.

resultsIn the study, 92.3% of the participants considered that the branch of bioethics is necessary in medical practice. Regarding challenging bioethics issues, only 86% of the participants consider that the miscarriage risk should be discussed after an invasive procedure. Furthermore, it is not clear for responders whether informed consent is a medical or legal obligation (43% vs 33%) and whether information should be provided orally or written (49% vs 46%). Finally, 32% of healthcare practitioners declare that they are not fully aware of the law concerning the rights of the fetus.

conclusionsAlthough healthcare professionals acknowledge the distinct role of bioethics, mismanagement of ethical dilemmas reveals that under-graduate teaching of this discipline is not addressed effectively. Identifying the parameters that would improve the learning process would make a significant contribution in the routine clinical practice.

Indexed as

bioethical dilemmasbioethicshealth professionals educationinformed consentprenatal counselling

Identifiers

PMID35371863
PMCPMC8973825
OpenAlexW4214947734

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.