Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41735668›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2026

Parental experiences of receiving genomic newborn screening results: findings from the BabyScreen+ study.

Erin Tutty, Anaita Kanga-Parabia, Nathasha Kugenthiran, Jade Caruana, Lilian Downie, Clara Gaff, Nitzan Lang, Sebastian Lunke, Katrina Scarff, Zornitza Stark and 2 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

12 authors.

Erin TuttyMurdoch Children's Research Institute, Parkville, VIC, Australia.
Anaita Kanga-ParabiaMurdoch Children's Research Institute, Parkville, VIC, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4656-9246
Nathasha KugenthiranMurdoch Children's Research Institute, Parkville, VIC, Australia.
Jade CaruanaMurdoch Children's Research Institute, Parkville, VIC, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0335-6224
Lilian DownieMurdoch Children's Research Institute, Parkville, VIC, Australia.
Clara GaffMurdoch Children's Research Institute, Parkville, VIC, Australia.
Nitzan LangVictorian Clinical Genetics Services, Parkville, VIC, Australia.
Sebastian LunkeMurdoch Children's Research Institute, Parkville, VIC, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7168-0723
Katrina ScarffVictorian Clinical Genetics Services, Parkville, VIC, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5195-9727
Zornitza StarkMurdoch Children's Research Institute, Parkville, VIC, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8640-1371
Stephanie BestMurdoch Children's Research Institute, Parkville, VIC, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1107-8976
Alison D ArchibaldMurdoch Children's Research Institute, Parkville, VIC, Australia. aad@unimelb.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4496-8262

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genomic newborn screening (gNBS) provides the potential to offer significant health benefits. However, more evidence, including psychosocial impacts on parents, is needed before gNBS is ready for population-level implementation. The aim of this qualitative study was to explore parental experiences of receiving gNBS results from a prospective study, BabyScreen+. BabyScreen+ screened 1000 newborns for >600 genetic conditions that were early-onset, severe, and had management options available (prevention, surveillance or treatment). We interviewed parents three months after receiving their result. Interviews were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis, guided by Interpretive Description. Twenty-seven parents were interviewed, including nine who received a 'high chance' result for their newborn. Waiting for gNBS results was not unduly anxiety provoking. Low chance results provided psychosocial benefits including peace-of-mind and empowerment. Receiving a high chance result was unexpected and shocking, especially if the result was for a condition with significant treatment recommendations (e.g., transplantation). Psychosocial adaption to the subsequent diagnosis was an evolving process; access to genetic counselling, high-quality information and prompt referrals to specialists increased confidence in managing the condition and facilitated adaptation. All parents valued the high chance gNBS result given its clinical utility. The study provides support for gNBS by highlighting that it can provide valuable health information with minimal harms. Findings can be used to inform the implementation of population-scale gNBS.

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.