Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38678162›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2025

Negotiating severity behind the scenes: prenatal testing in Germany.

Tamar Nov-Klaiman, Hilary Bowman-Smart, Ruth Horn

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
10.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Editorial: severity in a genomic age.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2025
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Assessing the Ethical Considerations in the Era of Advanced Prenatal Testing and Genetic Counselling - Clinicians' Perspective.Indian journal of community medicine : official publication of Indian Association of Preventive & Social Medicine
    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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Tamar Nov-Klaiman *Institute of Ethics and History of Health in Society, University of Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany. tamar.nov.klaiman@med.uni-augsburg.de.ORCID 0000-0002-6611-4348
Hilary Bowman-SmartAustralian Centre for Precision Health, Clinical and Health Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia.
Ruth Horn *Institute of Ethics and History of Health in Society, University of Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-5714-3905
University of Augsburg · DEUniversity of South Australia · AU

Funding

RCUK | Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) ES/T00908X/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Foetal-related severity is a key concept in policy and legislation relating to access to both reproductive technologies and selective abortions in many countries around the world, but not in Germany. This study sheds light on how 'severity' in the context of prenatal testing is understood and negotiated within the particular socio-cultural and legal context of Germany, where 'severity' relating to foetal clinical findings neither counts as a justification to implement population prenatal screening programs, nor as a legal ground to terminate pregnancy. This study explores the views of women who undergo prenatal testing, as well as of professionals who encounter them, through semi-structured interviews. It showcases how they frame severity and questions whether the existing legal and regulatory framework relating to prenatal testing and termination of pregnancy addresses their concerns and needs regarding reproductive decision-making. The interviews (n = 27) reveal that despite it being legally outside the explicit reasons for testing and termination of pregnancy, both women and professionals negotiate severity behind the scenes. Their interpretation of severity is highly context-dependent and relies on clinical, social and familial facets. Their perceptions of severity guide them in their handling of and decision-making around pregnancy management. Acknowledging the personal nature of severity assessment and providing professional or legal guidance which explicitly mentions foetal anomaly as a legitimate factor in pregnancy management could provide healthcare professionals and patients with the room needed to manage the pregnancy favourably.

Indexed as

Genetic TestingPrenatal DiagnosisAdultFemaleGenetic CounselingGermanyHumansPregnancy

Identifiers

PMID38678162
PMCPMC11839981
OpenAlexW4395703533

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.