Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36547380›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of neonatal screening2022

Assessing the Content Quality of Online Parental Resources about Newborn Metabolic Disease Screening: A Content Analysis.

Olivia M Y Ngan, Wing Ki Wong, Janice Ching Tam, Chi Kong Li

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of neonatal screening, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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.

Olivia M Y NganMedical Ethics and Humanities Unit, School of Clinical Medicine, LKS Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.ORCID 0000-0002-2258-0806
Wing Ki WongFaculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Janice Ching TamFaculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Chi Kong LiDepartment of Paediatrics, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.ORCID 0000-0002-2810-5758

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Parents increasingly utilise the internet to obtain information on health practices, but the quality of online information about screening for inherited metabolic diseases (IMD) needs to be improved. A content analysis examined how IMD blood and urine tests were described online in local healthcare sectors between May and June 2021. Among the nine resources, four were blood test providers and five were urine test providers. All mentioned the test benefits and procedures. Other information, such as false-positive/negative or risk of pain, was infrequently mentioned. The descriptions of urine tests are advertised as outperforming blood tests and can be purchased from commercial laboratory sites without medical guidance. Two urine test providers claimed no false results were reported. A few commercial advertisements highlighted the simplicity of the urine test and potentially overstated the invasiveness of the blood test. We found that some advertisements described IMD as "silent killers" and emphasised the advantage of getting "reassurance" in controlling the child's developmental health and well-being. To better protect the parents, or broadly, the public interest, regulatory and oversight measures on the urine tests should be implemented to promote the proper use of genetic tests. Without timely regulation and oversight, the incorrect descriptions might create a public misconception about utilising these commercial laboratory tests to inform health decisions.

Indexed as

direct-to-consumerdried blood spot testexpanded newborn screeningHong Konginherited metabolic diseasesinterneturine test

Identifiers

PMID36547380
PMCPMC9782861

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.