Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38475925›Full record

ArticleBMC psychology2024

Experiences and concerns of parents of children with a 16p11.2 deletion or duplication diagnosis: a reflexive thematic analysis.

Charlotte E Butter, Caitlin L Goldie, Jessica H Hall, Kathy Leadbitter, Emma M M Burkitt, Marianne B M van den Bree, Jonathan M Green

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. The pleiotropic spectrum of proximal 16p11.2 CNVs.American journal of human genetics · 2024
    Review
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.

Charlotte E ButterDivision of Psychology and Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. charlotte.butter@manchester.ac.uk.
Caitlin L GoldieDivision of Psychology and Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Jessica H HallDivision of Psychological Medicine and Clinical Neurosciences, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
Kathy LeadbitterDivision of Psychology and Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Emma M M BurkittManchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
Marianne B M van den BreeDivision of Psychological Medicine and Clinical Neurosciences, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
Jonathan M GreenDivision of Psychology and Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.

Funding

7/9 Rare Genetic Disorders as a Window into the Genetic Architecture of Mental DisordersU01MH119758 · NIMH · CARDIFF UNIVERSITY · PI OWEN, MICHAEL JOHN, VAN DEN BREE, MARIANNE · 2019 to 2023
$1.4M
Medical Research Council MR/S037667/1NIMH NIH HHS U01 MH119758NIMH NIH HHS U01MH119758
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background16p11.2 proximal deletion and duplication syndromes (Break points 4-5) (593KB, Chr16; 29.6-30.2mb - HG38) are observed to have highly varied phenotypes, with a known propensity for lifelong psychiatric problems. This study aimed to contribute to a research gap by qualitatively exploring the challenges families with 16p11.2 deletion and duplication face by answering three research questions: (1) What are parents' perceptions of the ongoing support needs of families with children who have 16p11.2 living in the UK?; (2) What are their experiences in trying to access support?; (3) In these regards, do the experiences of parents of children with duplication converge or vary from those of parents of children with 16p11.2 deletion?

methods33 parents with children (aged 7-17 years) with 16p11.2 deletion or duplication participated in structured interviews, including the Autism Diagnostic Interview- Revised (ADI-R). Their answers to the ADI-R question 'what are your current concerns' were transcribed and subsequently analysed using Braun and Clarke's six step reflexive thematic analysis framework.

resultsThree themes were identified: (1) Child is Behind Peers (subthemes: developmentally; academically; socially; emotionally); (2) Metabolism and Eating Patterns and; (3) Support (subthemes: insufficient support available; parent has to fight to access support; COVID-19 was a barrier to accessing support; 16p11.2 diagnosis can be a barrier to support, child is well-supported).

conclusionsParents of children with either 16p11.2 deletion or duplication shared similar experiences. However, metabolism concerns were specific to parents of children with 16p11.2 deletion. The theme Child is Behind Peers echoed concerns raised in previous Neurodevelopmental Copy Number Variant research. However, there were some key subthemes relating to research question (2) which were specific to this study. This included parents' descriptions of diagnostic overshadowing and the impact of a lack of eponymous name and scant awareness of 16p11.2.

Indexed as

Autistic DisorderChromosome DeletionChildHumansParents16p11.2 deletion16p11.2 duplicationAutismChildrenExperiencesFamiliesNeurodevelopmentalOvershadowingQualitativeSupport

Identifiers

PMID38475925
PMCPMC10936105

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.