ArticleInternational journal of neonatal screening2024
Australian Public Perspectives on Genomic Newborn Screening: Risks, Benefits, and Preferences for Implementation.
Article in International journal of neonatal screening, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 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
29 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- Scaling up genomic newborn screening: implementation lessons from the BabyScreen+ study.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- Who and how we engage: A systemic mapping of stakeholder perspectives on genomic newborn screening.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- A qualitative study exploring young adult's attitudes towards adopting whole genome sequencing into newborn screening programs.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- Health economic evaluations of genomic newborn screening: Approaches by studies within the international consortium on newborn sequencing.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- Discomfort in the Unexpected: A Mixed-Methods Study on Australian Clinicians' Experiences of Explaining Prenatal Screening Results.The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology · 2026Article
- Article
- Parental experiences of receiving genomic newborn screening results: findings from the BabyScreen+ study.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- Semi-automated genomic newborn screening highlights complexities in reporting.NPJ genomic medicine · 2026Article
- Public and parent perspectives on genomic sequencing in newborn screening: a scoping review.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Review
- Article
- A population-representative survey on attitudes toward genomic newborn screening in Germany.Genetics in medicine open · 2026Article
- "The ability to get ahead": Australian parent perspectives on genomics in newborn screening and considerations for potential models of care.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2025Article
- Feasibility, acceptability and clinical outcomes of the BabyScreen+ genomic newborn screening study.Nature medicine · 2025Article
- Genomic Screening Consortium for Australian Newborns (GenSCAN).Journal of paediatrics and child health · 2025Review
- Public preferences for the value and implementation of genomic newborn screening: Insights from two discrete choice experiments in Australia.American journal of human genetics · 2025Article
- Data-driven consideration of genetic disorders for global genomic newborn screening programs.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2025Article
- Collaborative coding in inductive content analysis: Why, when, and how to do it.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Article
- Article
- Informed Consent for Newborn Genomic Screening: Interest-Holder Perspectives on Dynamic Consent in an Evolving Landscape.International journal of neonatal screening · 2025Article
- Development of an Online Scenario-Based Tool to Enable Research Participation and Public Engagement in Cystic Fibrosis Newborn Screening: Mixed Methods Study.Journal of participatory medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 1 institution in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Recent dramatic reductions in the timeframe in which genomic sequencing can deliver results means its application in time-sensitive screening programs such as newborn screening (NBS) is becoming a reality. As genomic NBS (gNBS) programs are developed around the world, there is an increasing need to address the ethical and social issues that such initiatives raise. This study therefore aimed to explore the Australian public's perspectives and values regarding key gNBS characteristics and preferences for service delivery. We recruited English-speaking members of the Australian public over 18 years of age via social media; 75 people aged 23-72 participated in 1 of 15 focus groups. Participants were generally supportive of introducing genomic sequencing into newborn screening, with several stating that the adoption of such revolutionary and beneficial technology was a moral obligation. Participants consistently highlighted receiving an early diagnosis as the leading benefit, which was frequently linked to the potential for early treatment and intervention, or access to other forms of assistance, such as peer support. Informing parents about the test during pregnancy was considered important. This study provides insights into the Australian public's views and preferences to inform the delivery of a gNBS program in the Australian context.
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.