Literature DB >> 26577044

Preferences for prenatal tests for Down syndrome: an international comparison of the views of pregnant women and health professionals.

Melissa Hill1, Jo-Ann Johnson2, Sylvie Langlois3, Hyun Lee3, Stephanie Winsor4, Brigid Dineley4, Marisa Horniachek4, Faustina Lalatta5, Luisa Ronzoni5, Angela N Barrett6, Henna V Advani6, Mahesh Choolani6, Ron Rabinowitz7, Eva Pajkrt8, Rachèl V van Schendel9, Lidewij Henneman9, Wieke Rommers10, Caterina M Bilardo10, Paula Rendeiro11, Maria João Ribeiro12, José Rocha11,12, Ida Charlotte Bay Lund13, Olav B Petersen14, Naja Becher14, Ida Vogel14, Vigdis Stefánsdottir15, Sigrun Ingvarsdottir16,17, Helga Gottfredsdottir16,17, Stephen Morris18, Lyn S Chitty1.   

Abstract

Non-invasive prenatal testing is increasingly available worldwide and stakeholder viewpoints are essential to guide implementation. Here we compare the preferences of women and health professionals from nine different countries towards attributes of non-invasive and invasive prenatal tests for Down syndrome. A discrete choice experiment was used to obtain participants' stated preference for prenatal tests that varied according to four attributes: accuracy, time of test, risk of miscarriage, and type of information. Pregnant women and health professionals were recruited from Canada, Denmark, Iceland, Israel, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, Singapore, and the United Kingdom. A total of 2666 women's and 1245 health professionals' questionnaires were included in the analysis. Differences in preferences were seen between women and health professionals within and between countries. Overall, women placed greater emphasis on test safety and comprehensive information than health professionals, who emphasised accuracy and early testing. Differences between women's and health professionals' preferences are marked between countries. Varied approaches to implementation and service delivery are therefore needed and individual countries should develop guidelines appropriate for their own social and screening contexts.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26577044      PMCID: PMC5070900          DOI: 10.1038/ejhg.2015.249

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet        ISSN: 1018-4813            Impact factor:   4.246


  31 in total

Review 1.  A systematic review of issues around antenatal screening and prenatal diagnostic testing for genetic disorders: women of Asian origin in western countries.

Authors:  Juping Yu
Journal:  Health Soc Care Community       Date:  2011-11-08

2.  A comparison of Australian and UK obstetricians' and midwives' preferences for screening tests for Down syndrome.

Authors:  Sharon M Lewis; Fiona N Cullinane; Amanda J Bishop; Lyn S Chitty; Theresa M Marteau; Jane L Halliday
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 3.050

3.  Developing instruments for cross-cultural psychiatric research.

Authors:  J A Flaherty; F M Gaviria; D Pathak; T Mitchell; R Wintrob; J A Richman; S Birz
Journal:  J Nerv Ment Dis       Date:  1988-05       Impact factor: 2.254

Review 4.  Committee Opinion No. 640: Cell-Free DNA Screening For Fetal Aneuploidy.

Authors: 
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 7.661

5.  Conducting discrete choice experiments to inform healthcare decision making: a user's guide.

Authors:  Emily Lancsar; Jordan Louviere
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 4.981

6.  Is informed choice in prenatal testing universally valued? A population-based survey in Europe and Asia.

Authors:  A van den Heuvel; L Chitty; E Dormandy; A Newson; S Attwood; R Ma; B Masturzo; E Pajkrt; T M Marteau
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2009-04-15       Impact factor: 6.531

7.  Women's and health professionals' preferences for prenatal tests for Down syndrome: a discrete choice experiment to contrast noninvasive prenatal diagnosis with current invasive tests.

Authors:  Melissa Hill; Jane Fisher; Lyn S Chitty; Stephen Morris
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2012-08-30       Impact factor: 8.822

8.  Attitudes towards non-invasive prenatal testing for aneuploidy among US adults of reproductive age.

Authors:  M Allyse; L C Sayres; T A Goodspeed; M K Cho
Journal:  J Perinatol       Date:  2014-03-06       Impact factor: 2.521

9.  Evaluation of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for aneuploidy in an NHS setting: a reliable accurate prenatal non-invasive diagnosis (RAPID) protocol.

Authors:  Melissa Hill; David Wright; Rebecca Daley; Celine Lewis; Fiona McKay; Sarah Mason; Nicholas Lench; Abigail Howarth; Christopher Boustred; Kitty Lo; Vincent Plagnol; Kevin Spencer; Jane Fisher; Mark Kroese; Stephen Morris; Lyn S Chitty
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2014-07-16       Impact factor: 3.007

10.  Factors affecting the uptake of prenatal screening tests for congenital anomalies; a multicentre prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Janneke T Gitsels-van der Wal; Pieternel S Verhoeven; Judith Manniën; Linda Martin; Hans S Reinders; Evelien Spelten; Eileen K Hutton
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2014-08-09       Impact factor: 3.007

View more
  19 in total

1.  Perspectives of Pregnant People and Clinicians on Noninvasive Prenatal Testing: A Systematic Review and Qualitative Meta-synthesis.

Authors:  Meredith Vanstone; Alexandra Cernat; Umair Majid; Forum Trivedi; Chanté De Freitas
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2019-02-19

2.  TRIDENT-2: National Implementation of Genome-wide Non-invasive Prenatal Testing as a First-Tier Screening Test in the Netherlands.

Authors:  Karuna R M van der Meij; Erik A Sistermans; Merryn V E Macville; Servi J C Stevens; Caroline J Bax; Mireille N Bekker; Caterina M Bilardo; Elles M J Boon; Marjan Boter; Karin E M Diderich; Christine E M de Die-Smulders; Leonie K Duin; Brigitte H W Faas; Ilse Feenstra; Monique C Haak; Mariëtte J V Hoffer; Nicolette S den Hollander; Iris H I M Hollink; Fernanda S Jehee; Maarten F C M Knapen; Angelique J A Kooper; Irene M van Langen; Klaske D Lichtenbelt; Ingeborg H Linskens; Merel C van Maarle; Dick Oepkes; Mijntje J Pieters; G Heleen Schuring-Blom; Esther Sikkel; Birgit Sikkema-Raddatz; Dominique F C M Smeets; Malgorzata I Srebniak; Ron F Suijkerbuijk; Gita M Tan-Sindhunata; A Jeanine E M van der Ven; Shama L van Zelderen-Bhola; Lidewij Henneman; Robert-Jan H Galjaard; Diane Van Opstal; Marjan M Weiss
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2019-11-07       Impact factor: 11.025

3.  A Hierarchical Bayes Approach to Modeling Heterogeneity in Discrete Choice Experiments: An Application to Public Preferences for Prenatal Screening.

Authors:  Tima Mohammadi; Wei Zhang; Julie Sou; Sylvie Langlois; Sarah Munro; Aslam H Anis
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2020-04       Impact factor: 3.883

4.  Noninvasive Prenatal Testing for Trisomies 21, 18, and 13, Sex Chromosome Aneuploidies, and Microdeletions: A Health Technology Assessment.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2019-02-19

5.  Evaluation of preferences of women and healthcare professionals in Singapore for implementation of noninvasive prenatal testing for Down syndrome.

Authors:  Angela Natalie Barrett; Henna Vishal Advani; Lyn S Chitty; Lin Lin Su; Arijit Biswas; Wei Ching Tan; Melissa Hill; Mahesh Choolani
Journal:  Singapore Med J       Date:  2016-06-29       Impact factor: 1.858

6.  Preferences for prenatal diagnosis of sickle-cell disorder: A discrete choice experiment comparing potential service users and health-care providers.

Authors:  Melissa Hill; Eugene Oteng-Ntim; Frida Forya; Mary Petrou; Stephen Morris; Lyn S Chitty
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2017-05-15       Impact factor: 3.377

Review 7.  Application of discrete choice experiments to enhance stakeholder engagement as a strategy for advancing implementation: a systematic review.

Authors:  Ramzi G Salloum; Elizabeth A Shenkman; Jordan J Louviere; David A Chambers
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2017-11-23       Impact factor: 7.327

8.  Positive Attitudes towards Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT) in a Swedish Cohort of 1,003 Pregnant Women.

Authors:  Ellika Sahlin; Magnus Nordenskjöld; Peter Gustavsson; Josephine Wincent; Susanne Georgsson; Erik Iwarsson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-05-19       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Uptake, outcomes, and costs of implementing non-invasive prenatal testing for Down's syndrome into NHS maternity care: prospective cohort study in eight diverse maternity units.

Authors:  Lyn S Chitty; David Wright; Melissa Hill; Talitha I Verhoef; Rebecca Daley; Celine Lewis; Sarah Mason; Fiona McKay; Lucy Jenkins; Abigail Howarth; Louise Cameron; Alec McEwan; Jane Fisher; Mark Kroese; Stephen Morris
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2016-07-04

Review 10.  Has noninvasive prenatal testing impacted termination of pregnancy and live birth rates of infants with Down syndrome?

Authors:  Melissa Hill; Angela Barrett; Mahesh Choolani; Celine Lewis; Jane Fisher; Lyn S Chitty
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2017-12       Impact factor: 3.050

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.