ArticleThe Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology2025
Insights and Experiences From the 'Gatekeepers': A Qualitative Study Exploring Clinician Perspectives on Providing Publicly Funded Prenatal Exome Sequencing.
Article in The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology, 2025. 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
Abstract
backgroundGenomics has improved etiological diagnosis for foetal structural anomalies. It is being increasingly utilised in prenatal investigation both in Australia and internationally. To date, literature reporting diagnostic yield according to indication has been available. There is limited literature around the challenges of implementation and other aspects of utility.
aimsWe aimed to explore the experiences and perspectives of clinicians involved with the delivery of a state-wide public prenatal exome sequencing (pES) service in Australia. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis qualitative study was developed using a pragmatism framework. A multidisciplinary cohort of clinicians across all tertiary foetal medicine units in Victoria was interviewed. Inductive content analysis was used to understand the experiences, impact, and utility of pES.
resultsEight clinician interviews were analysed. The impact of pES on clinicians included: increased pressure, higher emotional toll, and balancing the benefits with resource limitations. PES was most useful when it provided prognostic information. The clinicians felt that pES had the most utility for patients when the result informed their decision about whether or not to continue a pregnancy. Clinicians acknowledged their 'gatekeeper' role and valued a collaborative, multidisciplinary approach. The main perceived harm for patients was the anxiety associated with waiting times for results.
conclusionsThis study provides insights into the delivery of a publicly funded pES program. Our findings highlight the importance of the multidisciplinary team in the successful implementation of genomic technologies in reproductive health.
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.