ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2026
Are we Prepared? Genetic Counseling for Stillbirth in the Sequencing Era.
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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Stillbirth affects approximately 1 in 175 pregnancies annually in the United States. Although the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommends genetic testing as part of the stillbirth evaluation, families often face barriers to obtaining a complete evaluation. Expansion of the diagnostic evaluation of stillbirth is expected to include exome/genome sequencing, with preliminary studies demonstrating its diagnostic utility. Consequently, genetic counselors (GCs) are expected to play an expanding role in post-stillbirth care. This study explored current genetic counseling practices for stillbirth and GCs' preparedness to support patients in this setting. A cross-sectional survey was distributed across four channels. Eligible participants included GCs in the United States and Canada with at least 1 year of prenatal experience. The survey assessed GC frequency and timing in stillbirth counseling, genetic testing practices, comfort addressing psychosocial needs, and perceived barriers to care. Responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Group comparisons were performed using Chi-square and Fisher's exact tests. Open-ended responses were coded for themes. Seventy-one responses were analyzed. Approximately half of respondents (49.3%, n = 36) reported "never/very rarely/rarely" counseling patients postpartum, despite this being the optimal time to offer genetic testing. Delivering providers (46.5%, n = 33) were often responsible for informing patients about testing and obtaining consent, compared to GCs (11.3%, n = 8). Although chromosomal microarray (CMA) is recommended as the standard of care (SOC), 12.7% (n = 9) of GCs reported not offering CMA for anomalous and non-anomalous stillbirths. Perceived barriers to SOC testing included reported lack of obstetrician awareness (91.5%, n = 65) and challenges coordinating specimen collection (90.1%, n = 64). These findings highlight barriers to SOC genetic evaluation and underscore the need to strengthen institutional protocols, enhance provider education, and develop stillbirth-specific genetic counseling guidelines. GC involvement in these efforts will be essential to promoting equitable access to comprehensive post-stillbirth care as sequencing becomes integrated into practice.
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.