ArticleHeliyon2024
Development and assessment of a knowledge, attitude, and practice (KAP) questionnaire for genetic counselees with preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) indications.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) can reduce the risk of familial genetic diseases, chromosome abnormalities, and recurrent abortions. It is unclear whether genetic counselees with PGT indications understand and accept the implications of PGT. A well-developed and validated tool is needed to evaluate the knowledge, attitude, and practice (KAP) levels of genetic counselees with PGT indications. The purpose of this study was to develop and validate a PGT KAP questionnaire (PGT-KAP-Q) for genetic counselees with PGT indications. Methods: First, we established an item pool based on a literature review and qualitative interviews. Second, we developed the PGT-KAP-Q using the Delphi method. Third, we evaluated the quality of the questionnaire using item analysis and psychometric evaluation. The item analysis included extreme value comparison, application of the correlation and Cronbach's alpha (α) coefficient methods, and factor analysis. We also evaluated the content and structural validity of the questionnaire, as well as the internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and split-half reliability. Findings: After the literature review and interviews, and based on three rounds of expert consultations, we formed a 43-item questionnaire. In the validity analysis, the item's content validity index (I-CVI) and the average scale level CVI (S-CVI/Ave) values (>0.78 and >0.95, respectively) confirmed the questionnaire's content validity. Exploratory factor analysis showed that all 43 items had strong factor loadings (>0.4), and the three factors of the PGT-KAP-Q explained 51.97 % of the total variance. The Cronbach's α coefficient for the questionnaire was 0.95 ( Interpretation: The 43-item PGT-KAP-Q for genetic counselees with PGT indications is reliable and valid. It contains a moderate number of items, is easy for patients to understand and accept, and can be used for clinical research and applications.
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.