ArticleChildren (Basel, Switzerland)2023
What Mothers Know about Newborn Bloodspot Screening and the Sources They Use to Acquire This Knowledge: A Pilot Study in Flanders.
Article in Children (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The relationship between mothers' health literacy and their knowledge and attitudes towards newborn screening.Journal of community genetics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To learn what mothers know about newborn bloodspot screening (NBS), the procedure, and the sources used, a pilot study was performed. An online questionnaire was developed, with the first part focused on characteristics and the NBS procedure, and the second on knowledge, information sources, and health care providers (HCPs). This questionnaire was accessible until 200 answers were received. The characteristics of respondents were representative for the population. Mothers gave verbal consent in 69.5% of cases, 12.5% did not, and 18% stated that no consent was requested. The 'knowledge' part contained 12 closed questions, five multiple-choice questions on sources, and assessments (5-point Likert scores) of the information transfer. The mean knowledge level was 7.2/12. Screening concepts (consequences, likelihood, sensitivity, carrier) and absence of notification of normal findings were well known. The fact that NBS is not compulsory was poorly known, and post-analysis sample handling procedures were poorly understood. Key HCPs were midwifes (80.5%) and nurses (38.5%). When the leaflet (44%) was provided, the majority read it. Mean Likert scores were 3.36, 3.38, 3.11 and 3.35 for clarity, timing appropriateness, sufficiency, and usefulness. The knowledge level and consent practices were reasonably good. Key HCP were midwives and nurses, the leaflets were supporting. This should enable a quality improvement program to a sustainable NBS program in Flanders.
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.