Literature DB >> 21624881

Parents' decisions to screen newborns for FMR1 gene expansions in a pilot research project.

Debra Skinner1, Summer Choudhury, John Sideris, Sonia Guarda, Allen Buansi, Myra Roche, Cynthia Powell, Donald B Bailey.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to document rates of parental consent in a pilot study of newborn screening for FMR1 gene expansions, examine demographic characteristics of mothers who consented or declined, describe the reasons for their decision, and discuss ethical and social aspects of the consent process.
METHODS: A brief survey was used to record basic demographic data from mothers and an open-ended question was used to elicit parents' reasons for accepting or declining screening. A descriptive analysis was conducted on the number of mothers who consented to or declined screening, and a logistic regression model predicted mothers' likelihood to agree to screening based on demographic characteristics. Reasons for decisions were analyzed using content analysis. The study was conducted at University of North Carolina Hospitals. A total of 2137 mothers were approached.
RESULTS: The uptake rate for couples was 63%. Acceptance rates varied by race/ethnicity, with black respondents being less likely to accept screening. Primary reasons for accepting were "to know," "belief in research," and "the test was minimal/no risk." Reasons for declining included not wanting to know or worry, not being a good time, and issues with testing children or with genetic tests.
CONCLUSIONS: Findings demonstrate that a majority of parents accepted newborn screening for FMR1 gene expansions, but decision rates and reasons for accepting or declining varied in part as a function of race/ethnicity and in part as a function of what parents most valued or feared in their assessment of risks and benefits.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21624881      PMCID: PMC3103273          DOI: 10.1542/peds.2010-3078

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pediatrics        ISSN: 0031-4005            Impact factor:   7.124


  41 in total

1.  Distrust, race, and research.

Authors:  Giselle Corbie-Smith; Stephen B Thomas; Diane Marie M St George
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2002-11-25

2.  Ethical issues in newborn screening research: lessons from the Wisconsin cystic fibrosis trial.

Authors:  Holly A Taylor; Benjamin S Wilfond
Journal:  J Pediatr       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 4.406

3.  Research for newborn screening: developing a national framework.

Authors:  Jeffrey R Botkin
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 7.124

Review 4.  Newborn screening: new developments, new dilemmas.

Authors:  N J Kerruish; S P Robertson
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 2.903

Review 5.  Balancing benefits and risks for cystic fibrosis newborn screening: implications for policy decisions.

Authors:  Benjamin S Wilfond; Richard B Parad; Norman Fost
Journal:  J Pediatr       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 4.406

6.  Attitudes and beliefs of African Americans toward participation in medical research.

Authors:  G Corbie-Smith; S B Thomas; M V Williams; S Moody-Ayers
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 5.128

7.  Pediatricians' attitudes toward expanding newborn screening.

Authors:  Kruti Acharya; Paul D Ackerman; Lainie Friedman Ross
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 7.124

8.  Screening for Fragile X Syndrome: parent attitudes and perspectives.

Authors:  Debra Skinner; Karen L Sparkman; Donald B Bailey
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2003 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 8.822

Review 9.  Fragile X-associated tremor/ataxia syndrome (FXTAS).

Authors:  Paul J Hagerman; Randi J Hagerman
Journal:  Ment Retard Dev Disabil Res Rev       Date:  2004

10.  Discovering fragile X syndrome: family experiences and perceptions.

Authors:  Donald B Bailey; Debra Skinner; Karen L Sparkman
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 7.124

View more
  20 in total

1.  Design and evaluation of a decision aid for inviting parents to participate in a fragile X newborn screening pilot study.

Authors:  Donald B Bailey; Megan A Lewis; Shelly L Harris; Tracey Grant; Carla Bann; Ellen Bishop; Myra Roche; Sonia Guarda; Leah Barnum; Cynthia Powell; Bradford L Therrell
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2012-06-27       Impact factor: 2.537

2.  "If He Has it, We Know What to Do": Parent Perspectives on Familial Risk for Autism Spectrum Disorder.

Authors:  Katherine E MacDuffie; Lauren Turner-Brown; Annette M Estes; Benjamin S Wilfond; Stephen R Dager; Juhi Pandey; Lonnie Zwaigenbaum; Kelly N Botteron; John R Pruett; Joseph Piven; Holly L Peay
Journal:  J Pediatr Psychol       Date:  2020-03-01

3.  Longitudinal interviews of couples diagnosed with diminished ovarian reserve undergoing fragile X premutation testing.

Authors:  Lisa M Pastore; Logan B Karns; Karen Ventura; Myra L Clark; Richard H Steeves; Nancy Callanan
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2013-06-14       Impact factor: 2.537

4.  Biobank participant support of newborn screening for disorders with variable treatment and intervention options.

Authors:  Megan E Bunnell; Beth A Tarini; Michael Petros; Aaron J Goldenberg; Aishwarya Arjunan; Catherine Wicklund
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2016-09-01

5.  Family Communication and Cascade Testing for Fragile X Syndrome.

Authors:  Melissa Raspa; Anne Edwards; Anne C Wheeler; Ellen Bishop; Donald B Bailey
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2016-03-09       Impact factor: 2.537

6.  Maternal Consequences of the Detection of Fragile X Carriers in Newborn Screening.

Authors:  Donald B Bailey; Anne Wheeler; Elizabeth Berry-Kravis; Randi Hagerman; Flora Tassone; Cynthia M Powell; Myra Roche; Louise W Gane; John Sideris
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2015-07-13       Impact factor: 7.124

7.  Levels and associations among self-esteem, fertility distress, coping, and reaction to potentially being a genetic carrier in women with diminished ovarian reserve.

Authors:  Ceylan Cizmeli; Marci Lobel; Jason Franasiak; Lisa M Pastore
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2013-03-15       Impact factor: 7.329

8.  Developmental and behavioral pediatricians' attitudes toward screening for fragile X.

Authors:  Kruti Acharya; Abigail Schindler
Journal:  Am J Intellect Dev Disabil       Date:  2013-07

9.  Obtaining consent from both parents for pediatric research: what does "reasonably available" mean?

Authors:  Daniel K Nelson; Debra Skinner; Sonia Guarda; Summer Choudhury; John Sideris; Leah Barnum; Kristy Ten Haagen; Quetrell Heyward; Donald B Bailey
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2012-12-24       Impact factor: 7.124

10.  Identification of a male with fragile X syndrome through newborn screening.

Authors:  Jessica Famula; Kirin Basuta; Louise W Gane; Randi J Hagerman; Flora Tassone
Journal:  Intractable Rare Dis Res       Date:  2015-11
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.