Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37752446›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2023

Informed choice and routinization of the second-trimester anomaly scan: a national cohort study in the Netherlands.

Eline E R Lust, Kim Bronsgeest, Lidewij Henneman, Neeltje Crombag, Caterina M Bilardo, Elsbeth H van Vliet-Lachotzki, Robert-Jan H Galjaard, Esther Sikkel, Monique C Haak, Mireille N Bekker

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

10 authors.

Eline E R LustDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, 3508 AB, The Netherlands.
Kim BronsgeestDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Lidewij HennemanDepartment of Human Genetics and Amsterdam Reproduction and Development Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Neeltje CrombagDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, 3508 AB, The Netherlands.
Caterina M BilardoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Elsbeth H van Vliet-LachotzkiVSOP-Patient Alliance for Rare and Genetic Diseases, Soest, The Netherlands.
Robert-Jan H GaljaardDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Esther SikkelDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Monique C HaakDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Mireille N BekkerDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, 3508 AB, The Netherlands. m.n.bekker-3@umcutrecht.nl.

Funding

ZonMw 543010001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSince 2007 all pregnant women in the Netherlands are offered the second-trimester anomaly scan (SAS) in a nationwide prenatal screening program. This study aims to assess the level of informed choice of women opting for the SAS and to evaluate the presence of routinization 16 years after its implementation. It further explores decisional conflict and women's decision making.

methodsThis prospective national survey study consisted of an online questionnaire which was completed after prenatal counseling and before undergoing the SAS. Informed choice was measured by the adapted multidimensional measure of informed choice (MMIC) and was defined in case women were classified as value-consistent, if their decision for the SAS was deliberated and made with sufficient knowledge.

resultsA total of 894/1167 (76.6%) women completed the questionnaire. Overall, 54.8% made an informed choice, 89.6% had good knowledge, 59.8% had deliberated their choice and 92.7% held a positive attitude towards the SAS. Women with low educational attainment (p=0.004) or respondents of non-Western descent (p=0.038) were less likely to make an informed choice. Decisional conflict was low, with a significantly lower decisional conflict score in women that made an informed choice (p<0.001). Most respondents (97.9%) did not perceive pressure to undergo the SAS.

conclusionsOur study showed a relatively low rate of informed choice for the SAS, due to absence of deliberation. Therefore, some routinization seem to be present in the Netherlands. However, most women had sufficient knowledge, did not perceive pressure and experienced low decisional conflict.

Indexed as

Cohort StudiesEducational StatusFemaleHumansMaleNetherlandsPregnancyPregnancy Trimester, SecondProspective StudiesDecision makingInformed choiceMid-trimester scanReproductive autonomySecond-trimester anomaly scan

Identifiers

PMID37752446
PMCPMC10521538

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.