Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37213778›Full record

ArticlePEC innovation2022

Do online decision aids reflect new prenatal screening and testing options? An environmental scan and content analysis.

Jessica Yu Ting Lu, Shannon McKinn, Lucinda Freeman, Erin Turbitt, Carissa Bonner

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in PEC innovation, 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
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jessica Yu Ting LuGraduate School of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Shannon McKinnSchool of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine & Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Lucinda FreemanSchool of Women and Children's Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Erin TurbittGraduate School of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Carissa BonnerSchool of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine & Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
University of Sydney · AUUniversity of Technology Sydney · AUUNSW Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Decision aids have been developed to help prospective parents make informed, shared decisions about medical tests, but these options are rapidly changing. This study aimed to identify and evaluate publicly available decision aids written in English for prospective parents seeking prenatal test information. Methods: A systematic review process was followed using 3 sources: known decision aid repositories, fetal medicine organisations and Google. The search, screening process, quality assessment, and data extraction was performed by two independent researchers. The quality assessment of the decision aids was based on the International Patient Decision Aids Standards (IPDAS v.4.0). Results: We identified 13 decision aids, which varied in the screening and diagnostic tests that they discussed. No decision aid met all the IPDAS v.4.0. criteria and no decision aid reported updated risk of miscarriage for amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling (CVS). There was a lack of decision aids for some common decisions in the prenatal context. Conclusion: We identified outdated content in current prenatal decision aids. The findings will inform healthcare professionals of the quality of current prenatal decision aids, which may facilitate their patients' informed decision-making about prenatal tests. Innovation: Considerations for improving future decision aids are outlined.

Indexed as

Decision aidGenetic counselingInformed decision-makingPrenatal diagnosisPrenatal screening

Identifiers

PMID37213778
PMCPMC10194264
OpenAlexW4223912751

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.