Literature DB >> 26163102

Swedish University Students' Opinion Regarding Information About Soft Markers.

Afsaneh Hayat Roshanai1, Peter Lindgren2, Karin Nordin1,3, Charlotta Ingvoldstad4,5.   

Abstract

The aim of this study was to investigate the opinions of Swedish university students about information regarding soft markers, when observed at second trimester ultrasound screening. A cross-sectional survey, where 85 Swedish university students completed a study specific questionnaire containing eleven hypothetical scenarios, involving various parameters (disease/syndromes/malformations with different characteristics), and location of the markers. Almost all participants indicated that they would wish to be informed, prior to the ultrasound examination, about the assessment and significance of soft markers. However, the number of respondents who requested information about a potential actual finding was considerably less. Several participants wanted to be informed about detected markers associated to serious conditions but not when the marker indicated an increased risk for a treatable disease. Also, the specific location of the marker was of importance to the participants. The majority of respondents wished to be informed about the soft markers if they were observed in the heart or the brain of the foetus, compared to if they were located in the intestine or the skeleton. The students' opinion, in this study, implicate the importance of pre-examination information to enable expectant parents to make informed choice regarding the second trimester ultrasound screening as well as on reciving information of actual findings.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Information request; Informed decision; Presumptive parents’; Second trimester; Soft markers; Ultrasound examination; University students

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26163102     DOI: 10.1007/s10897-015-9852-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Genet Couns        ISSN: 1059-7700            Impact factor:   2.537


  26 in total

1.  Utility of minor ultrasonographic markers in the prediction of abnormal fetal karyotype at a prenatal diagnostic center.

Authors:  B D Sohl; A L Scioscia; N E Budorick; T R Moore
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 8.661

Review 2.  The significance of the nuchal fold in the second trimester fetus.

Authors:  Beryl Benacerraf
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 3.050

3.  Practice guidelines for performance of the routine mid-trimester fetal ultrasound scan.

Authors:  L J Salomon; Z Alfirevic; V Berghella; C Bilardo; E Hernandez-Andrade; S L Johnsen; K Kalache; K-Y Leung; G Malinger; H Munoz; F Prefumo; A Toi; W Lee
Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 7.299

4.  Confidentiality versus duty to inform--an empirical study on attitudes towards the handling of genetic information.

Authors:  Katharina Wolff; Wibecke Brun; Gerd Kvale; Karin Nordin
Journal:  Am J Med Genet A       Date:  2007-01-15       Impact factor: 2.802

Review 5.  Meta-analysis of second-trimester markers for trisomy 21.

Authors:  M Agathokleous; P Chaveeva; L C Y Poon; P Kosinski; K H Nicolaides
Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2013-01-24       Impact factor: 7.299

6.  Second-trimester ultrasound to detect fetuses with Down syndrome: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  R Smith-Bindman; W Hosmer; V A Feldstein; J J Deeks; J D Goldberg
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2001-02-28       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  Adolescents' opinions about genetic risk information, prenatal diagnosis, and pregnancy termination.

Authors:  M Decruyenaere; G Evers-Kiebooms; M Welkenhuysen; J Bande-Knops; V Van Gerven; H Van den Berghe
Journal:  J Med Genet       Date:  1995-10       Impact factor: 6.318

8.  Facts first, then reaction--expectant fathers' experiences of an ultrasound screening identifying soft markers.

Authors:  Annika Åhman; Peter Lindgren; Anna Sarkadi
Journal:  Midwifery       Date:  2011-09-13       Impact factor: 2.372

9.  Did I really want to know this? Pregnant women's reaction to detection of a soft marker during ultrasound screening.

Authors:  Annika Ahman; Karin Runestam; Anna Sarkadi
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2010-01-18

Review 10.  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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.