ArticlePrenatal diagnosis2023
Understanding the experiences and perspectives of prenatal screening among a diverse cohort.
Article in Prenatal diagnosis, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pre-eclampsia risk-stratified planned birth at term: A survey of women's perspectives on acceptability and risk communication.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2026Article
- The Meaning of Screening: Exploring user experience of an aneuploidy screening educational game.Journal of genetic counseling · 2026Article
- Are People From Black Communities Proportionately Represented in UK and US Studies Examining Views on Screening and Diagnostic Genetic Testing in Pregnancy? A Scoping Review.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2025Article
- Time for a New Norm: Experiences of 'Being Informed' and 'Having Choice' for Prenatal Screening for Chromosomal Conditions: A Qualitative Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- Informal Prenatal Genetic Screening Education: What can you learn from Google and YouTube?Genetics in medicine open · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionRapid advances in prenatal genetic screening technology make it difficult for providers to deliver adequate prenatal counseling. The aim of this study was to understand how prenatal screening educational approaches can meet the needs of patients.
methodsQualitative content analysis was conducted on a diverse population who were interviewed to explore their perceived experiences and preferences for prenatal screening educational delivery.
resultsTwenty-two women from three US sites were interviewed. Participants were racially/ethnically diverse with 22.7% identifying as Black or African American (n = 5), 40.9% as Hispanic (n = 9), and 4.5% as Pacific Islander (n = 1). Four themes were identified: prenatal screening education, prenatal screening decision-making, return of results, and suggestions for creating a decision aid. Most results were consistent with previous research not targeting a diverse population. DISCUSSION/
conclusionOur results indicate that learning style preferences vary between patients and that current methods are not consistently satisfying patient's desire for understanding, particularly with 'high-risk' results, suggesting that a standardized tool could improve knowledge and decrease decisional conflict. This diverse cohort suggested a list and description of each of the testing options offered, information about each condition being screened for, a timeline for the testing and return of results, costs associated, and non-technical language.
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.