Literature DB >> 17986068

'Balance' is in the eye of the beholder: providing information to support informed choices in antenatal screening via Antenatal Screening Web Resource.

Shenaz Ahmed1, Louise Bryant, Jenny Hewison.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The Antenatal Screening Web Resource (AnSWeR) was designed to support informed prenatal testing choices by providing balanced information about disability, based on the testimonies of disabled people and their families. We were commissioned by the developers to independently evaluate the website. This paper focused on how participants evaluated AnSWeR in terms of providing balanced information.
SETTING: West Yorkshire. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 69 people were drawn from three groups: health professionals, people with personal experience of tested-for conditions (Down's syndrome, cystic fibrosis and spina bifida) and people representing potential users of the resource.
METHOD: Data were collected via focus groups and electronic questionnaires.
RESULTS: Participants believed that information about the experience of living with the tested-for conditions and terminating a pregnancy for the conditions were important to support informed antenatal testing and termination decisions. However, there were differences in opinion about whether the information about the tested-for conditions was balanced or not. Some people felt that the inclusion of photographs of people with the tested-for conditions introduced biases (both positive and negative). Many participants were also of the opinion that AnSWeR presented insufficient information on termination of an affected pregnancy to support informed choice.
CONCLUSION: This study highlighted the difficulty of designing 'balanced' information about tested-for conditions and a lack of methodology for doing so. It is suggested that AnSWeR currently provides a counterbalance to other websites that focus on the medical aspects of disability. Its aim to provide 'balanced' information would be aided by increasing the number and range of case studies available on the website.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17986068      PMCID: PMC5060415          DOI: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2007.00455.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Expect        ISSN: 1369-6513            Impact factor:   3.377


  14 in total

1.  Quality of written information used in Down syndrome screening.

Authors:  J Murray; H Cuckle; I Sehmi; C Wilson; A Ellis
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 3.050

2.  Descriptive information about Down syndrome: a content analysis of serum screening leaflets.

Authors:  L D Bryant; J Murray; J M Green; J Hewison; I Sehmi; A Ellis
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 3.050

3.  Choices and rights: eugenics, genetics and disability equality.

Authors:  Tom Shakespeare
Journal:  Disabil Soc       Date:  1998-11

4.  Evaluating the reliability and validity of three tools to assess the quality of health information on the Internet.

Authors:  Gbogboade Ademiluyi; Charlotte E Rees; Charlotte E Sheard
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2003-06

5.  Determinants of parental decisions to abort for chromosome abnormalities.

Authors:  A Drugan; A Greb; M P Johnson; E L Krivchenia; W R Uhlmann; K S Moghissi; M I Evans
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  1990-08       Impact factor: 3.050

6.  Mixed messages: presentation of information in cystic fibrosis-screening pamphlets.

Authors:  G L Loeben; T M Marteau; B S Wilfond
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1998-10       Impact factor: 11.025

7.  Health information and interaction on the internet: a survey of female urinary incontinence.

Authors:  H Sandvik
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1999-07-03

8.  Information recall in genetic counselling: a pilot study of its assessment.

Authors:  S Michie; D French; A Allanson; M Bobrow; T M Marteau
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  1997 Sep-Oct

Review 9.  Psychosocial aspects of genetic screening of pregnant women and newborns: a systematic review.

Authors:  J M Green; J Hewison; H L Bekker; L D Bryant; H S Cuckle
Journal:  Health Technol Assess       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 4.014

10.  Prenatal diagnosis and genetic screening. Community and service implications. Summary and recommendations of a report of the Royal College of Physicians.

Authors: 
Journal:  J R Coll Physicians Lond       Date:  1989-10
View more
  13 in total

1.  Inside 'Inside View': reflections on stimulating debate and engagement through a multimedia live theatre production on the dilemmas and issues of pre-natal screening policy and practice.

Authors:  Gillian Lewando Hundt; Claudette Bryanston; Pam Lowe; Saul Cross; Jane Sandall; Kevin Spencer
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 3.377

2.  Considering 'balance' in information.

Authors:  Vikki Entwistle
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 3.377

3.  Prenatal testing for Down syndrome: comparison of screening practices in the UK and USA.

Authors:  Dagmar Tapon
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2009-11-03       Impact factor: 2.537

Review 4.  The relationship between the genetic counseling profession and the disability community: a commentary.

Authors:  Anne C Madeo; Barbara B Biesecker; Campbell Brasington; Lori H Erby; Kathryn F Peters
Journal:  Am J Med Genet A       Date:  2011-05-12       Impact factor: 2.802

5.  What is a "balanced" description? Insight from parents of individuals with down syndrome.

Authors:  Catriona Hippman; Angela Inglis; Jehannine Austin
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2011-12-20       Impact factor: 2.537

6.  Disability Experiences and Perspectives Regarding Reproductive Decisions, Parenting, and the Utility of Genetic Services: a Qualitative Study.

Authors:  C Roadhouse; C Shuman; K Anstey; K Sappleton; D Chitayat; E Ignagni
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2018-06-16       Impact factor: 2.537

7.  Decisions about testing and termination of pregnancy for different fetal conditions: a qualitative study of European White and Pakistani mothers of affected children.

Authors:  Shenaz Ahmed; Jenny Hewison; Josephine M Green; Howard S Cuckle; Janet Hirst; Jim G Thornton
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2008-10-09       Impact factor: 2.537

8.  Presenting life with cystic fibrosis: a Q-methodological approach to developing balanced, experience-based prenatal screening information.

Authors:  Katherine F Wright; Louise D Bryant; Stephen Morley; Jenny Hewison; Alistair J A Duff; Daniel Peckham
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2013-08-02       Impact factor: 3.377

9.  Imagined futures: how experiential knowledge of disability affects parents' decision making about fetal abnormality.

Authors:  Emma F France; Louise Locock; Kate Hunt; Sue Ziebland; Kate Field; Sally Wyke
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2011-05-30       Impact factor: 3.377

10.  Impairment Experiences, Identity and Attitudes Towards Genetic Screening: the Views of People with Spinal Muscular Atrophy.

Authors:  Felicity K Boardman; Philip J Young; Frances E Griffiths
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2017-06-30       Impact factor: 2.537

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.