Literature DB >> 28132396

Expert Knowledge Influences Decision-Making for Couples Receiving Positive Prenatal Chromosomal Microarray Testing Results.

M A Rubel1,2, A Werner-Lin3, F K Barg1,2, B A Bernhardt1.   

Abstract

To assess how participants receiving abnormal prenatal genetic testing results seek information and understand the implications of results, 27 US female patients and 12 of their male partners receiving positive prenatal microarray testing results completed semi-structured phone interviews. These interviews documented participant experiences with chromosomal microarray testing, understanding of and emotional response to receiving results, factors affecting decision-making about testing and pregnancy termination, and psychosocial needs throughout the testing process. Interview data were analyzed using a modified grounded theory approach. In the absence of certainty about the implications of results, understanding of results is shaped by biomedical expert knowledge (BEK) and cultural expert knowledge (CEK). When there is a dearth of BEK, as in the case of receiving results of uncertain significance, participants rely on CEK, including religious/spiritual beliefs, "gut instinct," embodied knowledge, and social network informants. CEK is a powerful platform to guide understanding of prenatal genetic testing results. The utility of culturally situated expert knowledge during testing uncertainty emphasizes that decision-making occurs within discourses beyond the biomedical domain. These forms of "knowing" may be integrated into clinical consideration of efficacious patient assessment and counseling.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Decision-making; Expert knowledge; Microarray; Prenatal testing; Uncertainty

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28132396     DOI: 10.1007/s11013-017-9521-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cult Med Psychiatry        ISSN: 0165-005X


  58 in total

1.  Genomics--the perfect information-seeking research problem.

Authors:  J David Johnson; Donald O Case; James E Andrews; Suzanne L Allard
Journal:  J Health Commun       Date:  2005-06

2.  Psychosocial factors affecting uptake of prenatal genetic testing: a pilot study.

Authors:  Monica Pivetti; Giannino Melotti; Davide Morselli; Mariangela Olivieri
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2013-10-22       Impact factor: 3.050

3.  Trust and sources of health information: the impact of the Internet and its implications for health care providers: findings from the first Health Information National Trends Survey.

Authors:  Bradford W Hesse; David E Nelson; Gary L Kreps; Robert T Croyle; Neeraj K Arora; Barbara K Rimer; Kasisomayajula Viswanath
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2005 Dec 12-26

4.  Annotating DNA variants is the next major goal for human genetics.

Authors:  Garry R Cutting
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2014-01-02       Impact factor: 11.025

5.  Couple's Narratives of Communion and Isolation Following Abnormal Prenatal Microarray Testing Results.

Authors:  Allison Werner-Lin; Frances K Barg; Katherine S Kellom; Kallyn J Stumm; Lisa Pilchman; Ashley N Tomlinson; Barbara A Bernhardt
Journal:  Qual Health Res       Date:  2015-09-08

6.  Embodied expertise: women's perceptions of the contraception consultation.

Authors:  Pam Lowe
Journal:  Health (London)       Date:  2005-07

7.  "Something Extra on Chromosome 5": Parents' Understanding of Positive Prenatal Chromosomal Microarray Analysis (CMA) Results.

Authors:  Sarah A Walser; Allison Werner-Lin; Amita Russell; Ronald J Wapner; Barbara A Bernhardt
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2016-03-04       Impact factor: 2.537

8.  The determinants and consequences of information seeking among cancer patients.

Authors:  Ronald Czaja; Clara Manfredi; Jammie Price
Journal:  J Health Commun       Date:  2003 Nov-Dec

9.  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

Review 10.  The Psychological Challenges of Replacing Conventional Karyotyping with Genomic SNP Array Analysis in Prenatal Testing.

Authors:  Sam Riedijk; Karin E M Diderich; Sanne L van der Steen; Lutgarde C P Govaerts; Marieke Joosten; Maarten F C M Knapen; Femke A T de Vries; Diane van Opstal; Aad Tibben; Robert-Jan H Galjaard
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2014-07-03       Impact factor: 4.241

View more
  6 in total

1.  Parental motivations for and adaptation to trio-exome sequencing in a prospective prenatal testing cohort: Beyond the diagnosis.

Authors:  Asha N Talati; Kelly L Gilmore; Emily E Hardisty; Anne D Lyerly; Christine Rini; Neeta L Vora
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2022-02-16       Impact factor: 3.242

2.  The influence of experiential knowledge and societal perceptions on decision-making regarding non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT).

Authors:  Sophie Montgomery; Zaneta M Thayer
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2020-10-19       Impact factor: 3.007

3.  'I Don't Like Uncertainty, I Like to Know': How and why uveal melanoma patients consent to life expectancy prognostication.

Authors:  Stephen L Brown; Peter L Fisher; Andrew Morgan; Cari Davies; Yasmin Olabi; Laura Hope-Stone; Heinrich Heimann; Rumana Hussain; Mary Gemma Cherry
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2022-04-26       Impact factor: 3.318

4.  What's out there for parents? A systematic review of online information about prenatal microarray and exome sequencing.

Authors:  Michelle Peter; Hannah McInnes-Dean; Jane Fisher; Dagmar Tapon; Lyn S Chitty; Melissa Hill
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2021-11-07       Impact factor: 3.242

5.  Couples experiences of receiving uncertain results following prenatal microarray or exome sequencing: A mixed-methods systematic review.

Authors:  Eleanor Harding; Jennifer Hammond; Lyn S Chitty; Melissa Hill; Celine Lewis
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2020-05-24       Impact factor: 3.242

6.  Parental experiences of uncertainty following an abnormal fetal anomaly scan: Insights using Han's taxonomy of uncertainty.

Authors:  Jennifer Hammond; Jasmijn E Klapwijk; Melissa Hill; Stina Lou; Kelly E Ormond; Karin E M Diderich; Sam Riedijk; Celine Lewis
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2020-07-07       Impact factor: 2.717

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.