ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2026
Experiences of Dutch parents undergoing prenatal genomic testing for fetal structural anomalies: A prospective qualitative analysis.
Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Prenatal Exome Sequencing (pES) increases the diagnostic rate for genetic disorders in pregnancies with structural abnormalities and substantially impacts parental decision-making regarding pregnancy continuation or termination. Previous qualitative research on parental experiences of pES has typically been performed several months after results were returned to parents. Moreover, parental experiences of pES might be dependent on cultural aspects and country-specific healthcare systems. This research therefore prospectively explores experiences of families undergoing pES in the Netherlands. Expectant parents undergoing pES because of ultrasound anomalies were invited to participate with two interviews: interview T1 after counseling for genetic testing but prior to return of results and interview T2 six months after return of results. We translated a previously designed Australian interview script, used in similar research, to Dutch, including four open-end and two multiple-choice questions in addition to demographic details. An inductive content analysis approach was used for coding and analysis. Twelve families were interviewed at T1, of which five participants agreed to T2 follow-up interviews. We constructed six content categories of importance: (1) Prenatal feelings of fear, uncertainty, guilt, and anxiety; (2) conflicting feelings in the face of (un)certainty; (3) overall satisfaction with genetic counseling; (4) decision-making influenced by desire for information about their child's quality of life; (5) decision-making influenced by reproductive options and family planning; and (6) importance of empathy, kindness, and clear communication from friends, family, and healthcare professionals. Many content categories show overlap to previous research. However, families in this cohort did not explicitly express negative opinions about waiting on results which is possibly explained by concurrently running multiple genetic testing modalities. Moreover, all participants mentioned positive experiences of the provided healthcare, partly because of swift multidisciplinary collaboration. This study highlights the value of pre-test counseling by clinical geneticists and shows the need for close collaboration between feto-maternal specialists, clinical geneticists, and laboratory specialists.
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.