Trial reportPrenatal diagnosis2026
Can an Animation Improve Parents' Knowledge and How Does It Compare to Written Information? Development and Survey Evaluation of an Animation for Parents About Prenatal Sequencing.
Trial report in Prenatal diagnosis, 2026. 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo develop and evaluate an animation for parents about prenatal sequencing.
methodsA total of 428 participants who had been pregnant, or whose partner had been pregnant, in the past 24 months. Parents, patient organisation representatives and clinicians co-designed the animation describing prenatal sequencing (pS). Participants were semi-randomly assigned to receive one of three interventions (leaflet, animation or both) and answered questions assessing their self-perceived and objective knowledge before (T1) and after the intervention (T2). Satisfaction with and ease of understanding of the information was assessed at T2.
resultsSurvey respondents' (leaflet [n = 130], animation [n = 153] and both leaflet and animation [n = 145]) self-perceived understanding and knowledge of genetics and objective knowledge of pS increased after all interventions. The leaflet and animation were equally effective in improving the objective knowledge of pS (F(2, 421) = 2.48, p = 0.085). The animation was viewed positively. Preferences for information format were mixed.
conclusionAnimated and written information can improve knowledge and understanding of pS. Our animation expands the available information resources for parents offered pS. Further research should evaluate the utility of the animation in a clinical setting.
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.