Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36424524›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2023

The more you do it, the easier it gets: using behaviour change theory to support health care professionals offering reproductive genetic carrier screening.

Stephanie Best, Janet C Long, Zoe Fehlberg, Tahlia Theodorou, Sarah Hatem, Alison Archibald, Jeffrey Braithwaite

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Multilevel barriers and facilitators to widespread use of preconception carrier screening in the United States.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Stephanie BestAustralian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia. stephanie.best@petermac.org.ORCID 0000-0002-1107-8976
Janet C LongAustralian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0553-682X
Zoe FehlbergAustralian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8449-206X
Tahlia TheodorouAustralian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Sarah HatemAustralian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Alison ArchibaldBruce Lefroy Centre, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Jeffrey BraithwaiteAustralian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Macquarie University · AUMurdoch Children's Research Institute · AUPeter MacCallum Cancer Centre · AURoyal Children's Hospital · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent advances in genomic sequencing have improved the accessibility of reproductive genetic carrier screening (RGCS). As awareness and interest grows, non-genetic health care professionals are increasingly offering RGCS to consumers. We conducted a qualitative interview study informed by behaviour change theory to identify influences on health care professionals considered as 'early adopters' offering RGCS through Mackenzie's Mission, an Australian national research study investigating the implementation of free RGCS to couple's preconception or in early pregnancy. Interviews were deductively analysed using the Theoretical Domains Framework to examine barriers and enabling factors. In total, we interviewed 31 health care professionals, who were primarily general practitioners (n = 23) offering RGCS through Mackenzie's Mission. Upon analysis, 15 barriers and 44 enablers to implementation were identified and categorised across three health care professional target behaviours 1. Engaging with RGCS, 2. Identifying eligible patients, and 3. Offering RGCS. Whilst all Theoretical Domains Framework domains were present, barriers were predominantly categorised as 'Environmental Context and Resources' e.g., lack of time, followed by 'Knowledge' e.g., lack of understanding about genetics and 'Beliefs about Capabilities' e.g., concern about giving high risk results to patients. Although health care professionals expressed a preference for offering RGCS through a comprehensive and supported model of care, such as Mackenzie's Mission, barriers remain. By understanding what drives current health care professionals' behaviour towards offering RGCS, behaviour change theory provides an avenue to direct future efforts based on evidence and improve service delivery.

Indexed as

Genetic Carrier ScreeningBehaviorFemaleHealth PersonnelHumansMalePregnancy

Identifiers

PMID36424524
PMCPMC9686264
OpenAlexW4309900024

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.