ArticleJournal of participatory medicine2025
Development of an Online Scenario-Based Tool to Enable Research Participation and Public Engagement in Cystic Fibrosis Newborn Screening: Mixed Methods Study.
Article in Journal of participatory medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06299566 (Exploring Perceptions on the Proposed Cystic Fibrosis Screening Protocol Incorporating Next Generation Sequencing), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Exploring Perceptions on the Proposed Cystic Fibrosis Screening Protocol Incorporating Next Generation Sequencing
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNewborn screening aims to identify babies affected by rare but serious genetic conditions. As technology advances, there is the potential to expand the newborn screening program following evaluation of the likely benefits and drawbacks. To inform these decisions, it is important to consider the family experience of screening and the views of the public. Engaging in public dialogue can be difficult. The conditions, screening processes, and associated moral and ethical considerations are complex.
objectiveThis study aims to develop a stand-alone online resource to enable a range of stakeholders to understand whether and how next-generation sequencing should be incorporated into the CF screening algorithm.
methodsAround 4 development workshops with policymakers, parents, and other stakeholders informed the design of an interactive activity, including the structure, content, and questions posed. Stakeholders were recruited to take part in the development workshops via purposeful and snowball sampling methods to achieve a diversity of views across roles and organizations, with email invitations sent to representative individuals with lived, clinical, and academic experience related to CF and screening. Ten stakeholders informed the development process including those with lived experience of CF (2/10, 20%), clinicians (2/10, 20%), and representatives from relevant government, charity, and research organizations (6/10, 60%). Vignettes constructed using interview data and translated into scripts were recorded to provide short films to represent and provoke consideration of families' experiences. Participants were recruited (n=6, adults older than 18 years) to test the resulting resource. Study advertisements were circulated via physical posters and digital newsletters to recruit participants who self-identified as having a reading difficulty or having English as a second language.
resultsAn open access online resource, "Cystic Fibrosis Newborn Screening: You Decide," was developed and usability and acceptability tested to provide the "user" (eg, a parent, the general public, or a health care professional) with an interactive scenario-based presentation of the potential outcomes of extended genetic testing, allowing them to visualize the impact on families. This included a learning workbook that explains key concepts and processes. The resulting tool facilitates public engagement with and understanding of complex genetic and screening concepts.
conclusionsOnline resources such as the one developed during this work have the potential to help people form considered views and facilitate access to the perspectives of parents and the wider public on genetic testing. These may be otherwise difficult to obtain but are of importance to health care professionals and policymakers.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT06299566; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06299566.
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.