Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40175294›Full record

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.

Morgan Daniel, Hannah McInnes-Dean, Wing Han Wu, Jane Fisher, Caroline Lafarge, Kerry Leeson-Beevers, Celine Lewis, Sophie Peet, Dagmar Tapon, Sarah L Wynn and 3 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialComparative Study
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Morgan DanielNorth Thames Genomic Laboratory Hub, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4455-5521
Hannah McInnes-DeanNorth Thames Genomic Laboratory Hub, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Wing Han WuNorth Thames Genomic Laboratory Hub, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Jane FisherAntenatal Results and Choices, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1318-0074
Caroline LafargeThe Graduate School, University of West London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2148-078X
Kerry Leeson-BeeversAlström Syndrome UK, Torquay, UK.
Celine LewisPopulation, Policy and Practice, UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7169-1521
Sophie PeetGenetic Alliance UK, London, UK.
Dagmar TaponQueen Charlotte's & Chelsea Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.
Sarah L WynnUnique - Rare Chromosome Disorder Support Group, Oxted, UK.
Lyn S ChittyNorth Thames Genomic Laboratory Hub, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4857-7138
Melissa HillNorth Thames Genomic Laboratory Hub, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3900-1425
Michelle PeterNorth Thames Genomic Laboratory Hub, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4977-8708

Funding

National Institute of Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research 127829NIHR Great Ormond Street Hospital Biomedical Research Centre
6 · The paper itself

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

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeParentsPrenatal DiagnosisAdultFemaleHumansMalePamphletsPregnancySurveys and Questionnairesanimationpatient educationpatient knowledgeprenatal sequencing

Identifiers

PMID40175294
PMCPMC13170059

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.