Literature DB >> 6694876

Parental response to repeat testing of infants with 'false-positive' results in a newborn screening program.

J R Sorenson, H L Levy, T W Mangione, S J Sepe.   

Abstract

Forty-five percent of the parents of 60 infants being retested in a newborn screening program for metabolic disorders understood that their infant was undergoing retesting because the first test result was abnormal. Fifty-five percent had incorrect or incomplete information, believing that retesting was routine, or that mistakes had been made in the original testing procedure, or they report being told nothing specific about the testing. Parents who were aware that the initial test was abnormal were no more anxious or depressed while waiting for the repeat test results than other parents. At a second interview after learning the normal results of the repeat test, both those parents informed of the initial abnormal result as well as those not informed were less anxious and depressed. However, 36% of the parents of these normal infants reported concern about the health of their infant because of the repeat testing. This concern was not related to a parent's knowledge that the initial test result was abnormal, but was greater in parents reporting that they had not received sufficient information about the screening/testing process and its significance for the health of their infant.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1984        PMID: 6694876

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


  18 in total

1.  How serious are the adverse effects of screening?

Authors:  W Feldman
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1990 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 5.128

Review 2.  Ethical issues in newborn screening and the impact of new technologies.

Authors:  Bridget Wilcken
Journal:  Eur J Pediatr       Date:  2003-11-14       Impact factor: 3.183

Review 3.  Evaluating screening tests and screening programmes.

Authors:  A E Ades
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  1990-07       Impact factor: 3.791

4.  Preschool child health surveillance.

Authors:  S J Gillam; A F Colver
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  1993-06

Review 5.  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 6.  Prevention. How much harm? How much benefit? 3. Physical, psychological and social harm.

Authors:  K G Marshall
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1996-07-15       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 7.  A review of the psychosocial effects of false-positive results on parents and current communication practices in newborn screening.

Authors:  J Hewlett; S E Waisbren
Journal:  J Inherit Metab Dis       Date:  2006-08-17       Impact factor: 4.982

8.  Communicating with parents about newborn screening: the skill of eliciting unspoken emotions.

Authors:  Beth A Tarini
Journal:  Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med       Date:  2012-01

9.  A comparative cost analysis of newborn screening for classic congenital adrenal hyperplasia in Texas.

Authors:  C A Brosnan; P Brosnan; B L Therrell; C H Slater; J M Swint; J F Annegers; W J Riley
Journal:  Public Health Rep       Date:  1998 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.792

10.  Pre-screening education in multiple marker screening programs: The effect on patient anxiety and knowledge.

Authors:  K E Ormond; E Pergament; B A Fine
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  1996-06       Impact factor: 2.537

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.