Informed choice to undergo prenatal screening: A comparison of two hospitals conducting testing either as part of a routine visit or requiring a separate visit

Journal of Medical Screening

Volumn 9, Issue 3, 2002, Pages 109-114

  Dormandy, E ^a   Hooper, R ^a   Michie, S ^a,b   Marteau, Theresa M ^a  

^a KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DOWN SYNDROME; ETHNOLOGY; FEMALE; HOSPITAL; HUMAN; INFORMED CONSENT; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PARITY; PATIENT ATTITUDE; PRENATAL SCREENING; SOCIOECONOMICS;

EMPIRICAL APPROACH; GENETICS AND REPRODUCTION;

ADULT; ALPHA-FETOPROTEINS; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; DOWN SYNDROME; ENGLAND; FEMALE; HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; HOSPITALS; HUMANS; MASS SCREENING; MATERNAL AGE; MODELS, THEORETICAL; PATIENT ACCEPTANCE OF HEALTH CARE; PATIENT EDUCATION; PREGNANCY; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES;

EID: 0036401547     PISSN: 09691413     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/jms.9.3.109     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Andrews LB, Fullarton JE, Holtzman NA, et al. Assessing genetic risks: implications for health and social policy. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1994.
2. General Medical Council. Seeking patients' consent: the ethical considerations. London: General Medical Council, 1999.
3. Jepson RG, Forbes CA, Sowden AJ, et al. Increasing informed uptake and non-uptake of screening: evidence from a systematic review. Health Expectations 2001;4:116-26.
4. Marteau TM, Dormandy E, Michie S. A measure of informed choice. Health Expectations 2001;4:99-108.
5. Michie S, Dormandy E, Marteau TM. The multi-dimensional measure of informed choice: a validation study. Patient Education and Counseling 2002 (in press).
6. O'Connor A, O'Brien Pallas LL. Decisional conflict. In: McFarlane GK, McFarlane EA, eds. Nursing diagnosis and intervention. Toronto: Mosby, 1989:486-96.
7. O'Connor AM, Rostom A, Fiset V, et al. Decision aids for patients facing health treatment or screening decisions: systematic review. BMJ 1999;319:731-4.
8. Deyo RA. A key medical decision marker: the patient. BMJ 2001;323:466-7.
9. Hartley NE, Scotcher D, Harris H, et al. The uptake and acceptability to patients of cystic fibrosis carrier testing offered in pregnancy by the GP. J Med Genet 1997;34:450-64.
10. Bekker H, Modell M, Dennis G, et al. Uptake of cystic fibrosis carrier testing in primary care: supply push or demand pull? BMJ 1993;306:1584-6.
11. Lorenz RP, Botti JJ, Schmidt CM, et al. Encouraging patients to undergo prenatal genetic counseling before the day of amniocentesis. J Reprod Med 1985;30:933-5.
12. Dormandy E, Michie S, Weinman J, et al. Variation in uptake of serum screening: the role of service delivery. Prenat Diagn 2002;22:67-9.
13. Tambor ES, Bernhardt BA, Chase GA, et al. Offering cystic fibrosis carrier screening to an HMO population: factors associated with utilization. Am J Hum Genet 1994;55:626-37.
14. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists and the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, Joint Working Party. Fetal abnormalities: guidelines for screening, diagnosis and management: Report of a joint working party of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists and the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health. London: RCOG, 1997.
15. Conner M, Norman P, eds. Predicting health behaviour. Buckingham: Open University Press, 1996.
16. Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S. Applied logistic regression. New York: Wiley, 1989.
17. Ajzen I, Fishbein M. Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewaod Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1980.
18. Marteau TM, Dormandy E. Facilitating informed choice in prenatal testing: How well are we doing? Am J Med Genet 2001;106:185-90.