Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36788144›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2023

Experiences of nonpregnant couples after receiving reproductive genetic carrier screening results in Belgium.

Eva Van Steijvoort, Hilde Peeters, Hilde Vandecruys, Jasper Verguts, Karen Peeraer, Gert Matthijs, Pascal Borry

Abstract 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 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. The complex genomics of single gene disorders.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2023
    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.

Eva Van SteijvoortDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. eva.vansteijvoort@kuleuven.be.ORCID 0000-0003-3134-4028
Hilde PeetersDepartment of Human Genetics, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Hilde VandecruysDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Jessa Ziekenhuis Hasselt, Hasselt, Belgium.
Jasper VergutsDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Jessa Ziekenhuis Hasselt, Hasselt, Belgium.
Karen PeeraerDepartment of Development and Regeneration, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Gert MatthijsDepartment of Human Genetics, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Pascal BorryDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-4931-9560

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Reproductive genetic carrier screening (RGCS) allows for the identification of couples who have an increased likelihood of conceiving a child with a particular autosomal recessive or X-linked condition. The aim of this study was to assess the level of satisfaction, anxiety, knowledge retention, psychosocial and counseling-related aspects among couples who chose to have RGCS. Participants were initially informed about their screening results by telephone. After obtaining a written report of test results, participants were asked to complete an individual self-administered questionnaire. All participants (n = 67) felt they had enough information to make an informed choice. None of the participants regretted their choice to have RGCS. Test results were most often shared with parents (61%) or siblings (37%). Our findings demonstrate that the information/counseling and reporting strategy that was used in the context of this study led to high participant satisfaction, an increase in knowledge over time and favorable psychosocial and counseling-related outcomes.

Indexed as

Genetic CounselingGenetic TestingBelgiumChildGenetic Carrier ScreeningHumansParents

Identifiers

PMID36788144
PMCPMC9928592

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.