Literature DB >> 10752000

Women's experience of maternal serum screening.

J C Carroll1, J B Brown, A J Reid, P Pugh.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To explore the ideas, opinions, feelings, and experiences of women regarding prenatal genetic screening, specifically maternal serum screening (MSS).
DESIGN: Qualitative technique of focus groups.
SETTING: Northern, rural, inner-city, urban, and suburban communities in Ontario. PARTICIPANTS: Women who had given birth to babies from January 1994 to May 1996, but who were not currently pregnant (n = 60).
METHOD: Six focus groups composed of women living in various communities who had recently given birth to babies explored the experience of MSS. MAIN
FINDINGS: Women want informed choice about prenatal genetic screening. Three factors influenced women's decisions to undergo or decline prenatal genetic screening: their personal values, including their philosophy of life, moral, and religious values, and attitudes regarding Down syndrome and disability; social support including their partners, families, and friends; and quality of information from health care providers. Women want their providers to give them information personally; they want to receive the information as early as possible in prenatal care to allow time for reflection; and they want unbiased, accurate information in order to make a decision that is in keeping with their personal values and beliefs.
CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge of women's ideas, opinions, feelings, and experiences regarding MSS suggests specific ways health care providers can facilitate informed decision making in prenatal screening. Providing information about genetic testing needs to be individualized, with women actively participating in the decision-making process. Information needs described by these women could apply to other prenatal genetic tests that might be available in the future.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Empirical Approach; Genetics and Reproduction

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10752000      PMCID: PMC2144979     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can Fam Physician        ISSN: 0008-350X            Impact factor:   3.275


  25 in total

Review 1.  Towards informed decisions about prenatal testing: a review.

Authors:  T M Marteau
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  1995-12       Impact factor: 3.050

2.  Barriers and facilitators to seniors' independence. Perceptions of seniors, caregivers, and health care providers.

Authors:  J B Brown; C L McWilliam; V Mai
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 3.275

3.  Differences in practice patterns between obstetricians and family physicians: use of serum screening.

Authors:  J Yankowitz; D M Howser; J W Ely
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1996-04       Impact factor: 8.661

Review 4.  Rigour and qualitative research.

Authors:  N Mays; C Pope
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1995-07-08

5.  Reaching the parts other methods cannot reach: an introduction to qualitative methods in health and health services research.

Authors:  C Pope; N Mays
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1995-07-01

6.  Informed consent to undergo serum screening for Down's syndrome: the gap between policy and practice.

Authors:  D K Smith; R W Shaw; T M Marteau
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1994-09-24

7.  Serum screening for Down's syndrome: experiences of obstetricians in England and Wales.

Authors:  J M Green
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1994-09-24

8.  Ontario Maternal Serum Screening Program: practices, knowledge and opinions of health care providers.

Authors:  J C Carroll; A J Reid; C A Woodward; J A Permaul-Woods; S Domb; G Ryan; S Arbitman; B Fallis; J Kilthei
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1997-03-15       Impact factor: 8.262

9.  Evaluating patient's knowledge of maternal serum screening.

Authors:  V Goel; R Glazier; S Holzapfel; P Pugh; A Summers
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  1996-05       Impact factor: 3.050

10.  Qualitative research: Observational methods in health care settings.

Authors:  N Mays; C Pope
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1995-07-15
View more
  13 in total

1.  Pregnancy planning guide. Evidence-based information for prospective parents.

Authors:  Krista M Maier; Colleen M Kirkham; Elizabeth Lim; Ka Wai Cheung; Stefan Grzybowski
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 3.275

2.  Exploring adoption with clients: the need for adoption education within the genetic counseling profession.

Authors:  Cassandra L Perry; Martha J Henry
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2010-03-16       Impact factor: 2.537

3.  Rates of prenatal screening across health care regions in Ontario, Canada: a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Robin Z Hayeems; Michael Campitelli; Xiaomu Ma; Tianhua Huang; Mark Walker; Astrid Guttmann
Journal:  CMAJ Open       Date:  2015-04-02

4.  "What does this mean?" How Web-based consumer health information fails to support information seeking in the pursuit of informed consent for screening test decisions.

Authors:  Jacquelyn Burkell; D Grant Campbell
Journal:  J Med Libr Assoc       Date:  2005-07

5.  Maternal serum screening in Newfoundland and Labrador: do attitude and knowledge affect physicians' practice?

Authors:  Jonathan Cavanagh; Maria Mathews
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 3.275

6.  "Testing times, challenging choices": an Australian study of prenatal genetic counseling.

Authors:  Jan M Hodgson; Lynn H Gillam; Margaret A Sahhar; Sylvia A Metcalfe
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2009-10-02       Impact factor: 2.537

7.  Talking about disability in prenatal genetic counseling: a report of two interactive workshops.

Authors:  Jan Hodgson; Jon Weil
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2011-10-25       Impact factor: 2.537

Review 8.  A systematic review of decision support needs of parents making child health decisions.

Authors:  Cath Jackson; Francine M Cheater; Innes Reid
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 3.377

9.  Maternal age-based prenatal screening for chromosomal disorders: attitudes of women and health care providers toward changes.

Authors:  June C Carroll; Andrea Rideout; Brenda J Wilson; Judith Allanson; Sean Blaine; Mary Jane Esplen; Sandra Farrell; Gail E Graham; Jennifer MacKenzie; Wendy S Meschino; Preeti Prakash; Cheryl Shuman; Sherry Taylor; Stasey Tobin
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 3.275

10.  Exploring informed choice in the context of prenatal testing: findings from a qualitative study.

Authors:  Beth K Potter; Natasha O'Reilly; Holly Etchegary; Heather Howley; Ian D Graham; Mark Walker; Doug Coyle; Yelena Chorny; Mario Cappelli; Isabelle Boland; Brenda J Wilson
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2008-09-16       Impact factor: 3.377

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.