ArticleFrontiers in genetics2024
Delivery of a national prenatal exome sequencing service in England: a mixed methods study exploring healthcare professionals' views and experiences.
Article in Frontiers in genetics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- A nationwide survey on attitudes of obstetricians and gynecologists toward comprehensive prenatal genetic testing in Japan.Journal of human genetics · 2026Article
- "The Way We Do Things is Unsustainable"-Exploring Symptoms of Burnout Among Healthcare Professionals in Prenatal Genomics.Prenatal diagnosis · 2026Article
- Experiences of Dutch parents undergoing prenatal genomic testing for fetal structural anomalies: A prospective qualitative analysis.Journal of genetic counseling · 2026Article
- Insights and Experiences From the 'Gatekeepers': A Qualitative Study Exploring Clinician Perspectives on Providing Publicly Funded Prenatal Exome Sequencing.The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology · 2025Article
- A qualitative study to evaluate the preparedness of community paediatricians for genomic medicine in England - ready for take-off?Journal of community genetics · 2025Article
- Mainstreaming genomics in the National Health Service in England: a survey to understand preparedness and confidence among paediatricians.BMJ paediatrics open · 2025Article
- Equity and timeliness as factors in the effectiveness of an ethical prenatal sequencing service: reflections from parents and professionals.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2025Article
- Implementation of a National Prenatal Exome Sequencing Service in England: Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2025Article
- Implementation of a national rapid prenatal exome sequencing service in England: evaluation of service outcomes and factors associated with regional variation.Frontiers in genetics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
30 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: In October 2020, rapid prenatal exome sequencing (pES) was introduced into routine National Health Service (NHS) care in England, requiring the coordination of care from specialist genetics, fetal medicine (FM) and laboratory services. This mixed methods study explored the experiences of professionals involved in delivering the pES service during the first 2 years of its delivery in the NHS. Methods: A survey ( Results: Overall, professionals were positive about the pES service with 77% rating it as Good or Excellent. A number of benefits were reported, including the increased opportunity for receiving actionable results for parental decision-making, improving equity of access to genomic tests and fostering close relationships between FM and genetics departments. Nonetheless, there was evidence that the shift to offering pES in a clinical setting had brought some challenges, such as additional clinic time, administrative processes, perceived lack of autonomy in decision-making regarding pES eligibility and difficulty engaging with peripheral maternity units. Concerns were also raised about the lack of confidence and gaps in genomics knowledge amongst non-genetics professionals - especially midwives. However, the findings also highlighted value in both FM, obstetric and genetics professionals benefiting from further training with a focus on recognising and managing prenatally diagnosed genetic conditions. Conclusion: Healthcare professionals are enthusiastic about the benefits of pES, and through multi-collaborative working, have developed relationships that have contributed to effective communication across specialisms. Although limitations on resources and variation in knowledge about pES have impacted service delivery, professionals were hopeful that improvements to infrastructure and the upskilling of all professionals involved in the pathway would optimise the benefits of pES for both parents and professionals.
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.