Do women prefer to have screening tests for Down syndrome that have the lowest screen-positive rate or the highest detection rate?

Prenatal Diagnosis

Volumn 23, Issue 10, 2003, Pages 828-832

  Mulvey, Sheila ^a,b   Zachariah, Rebecca ^b   McIlwaine, Kate ^b   Wallace, Euan M ^a,b  

^a MONASH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^b MONASH MEDICAL CENTRE   (Australia)

Author keywords

Detection rates; Down syndrome; Screen positive rates; Screening preferences

Indexed keywords

AMNIOCENTESIS; ARTICLE; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; DOWN SYNDROME; FETUS; HIGH RISK PATIENT; HUMAN; PREGNANCY; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUESTIONNAIRE; SCREENING TEST;

ABORTION, SPONTANEOUS; ADULT; AUSTRALIA; DOWN SYNDROME; FEMALE; HUMANS; MASS SCREENING; MATERNAL AGE; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PREGNANCY; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; QUESTIONNAIRES; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 0142073800     PISSN: 01973851     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/pd.701     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Beekhuis JR, De Wolf BT, Mantingh A, Heringa MP. 1994. The influence of serum screening on the amniocentesis rate in women of advanced maternal age. Prenat Diagn 14: 199-202.
2. Gilbert RE, Augood C, Gupta R, et al. 2001. Screening for Down's syndrome: effects, safety, and cost effectiveness of first and second trimester strategies. Br Med J 323: 423-425.
3. Grobman WA, Dooley SL, Welshman EE, Pergament E, Calhoun EA. 2002. Preference assessment of prenatal diagnosis for Down syndrome: is 35 years a rational cutoff? Prenat Diagn 22: 1195-1200.
4. Halliday JL, Watson LF, Lumley J, Danks DM, Sheffield LJ. 1995. New estimates of Down syndrome risks at chorionic villus sampling, amniocentesis and live birth in women of advanced maternal age from a uniquely defined population. Prenat Diagn 15: 455-465.
5. Hook EB, Cross PK, Schreinemachers DM. 1983. Chromosomal abnormality rates at amniocentesis and live-born infants. JAMA 249: 2034-2038.
6. Kuppermann M, Feeny D, Gates E, Posner SF, Blumberg B, Washington AE. 1999. Preferences of women facing a prenatal diagnostic choice: long-term outcomes matter most. Prenat Diagn 19: 711-716.
7. Kuppermann M, Nease RF, Learman LA, Gates E, Blumberg B, Washington AE. 2000. Procedure-related miscarriages and Down syndrome-affected births: implications for prenatal testing based on women's preferences. Obstet Gynecol 96: 511-516.
8. Lam YH, Ghosh A, Tang MHY, et al. 1998. Second trimester maternal serum alpha-fetoprotein and human chorionic gonadotrophin screening for Down's syndrome in Hong Kong. Prenat Diagn 18: 585-589.
9. Lam YH, Tang MHY, Lee CP, et al. 2000. Acceptability of serum screening as an alternative to cytogenetic diagnosis of Down syndrome among women 35 years or older in Hong Kong. Prenat Diagn 20: 487-490.
10. Marteau TM, Cook R, Kidd J, et al. 1992. The psychological effects of false positive results in prenatal screening for fetal abnormality: a prospective study. Prenat Diagn 12: 205-214.
11. Riley M, Halliday J. 2001. Births in Victoria 1999-2000, Perinatal Data Collection Unit, Victorian Government Department of Human Services: Melbourne.
12. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. 1993. Report of the RCOG Working Party on Biochemical Markers and the Detection of Down's Syndrome. RCOG Press: London.
13. Spencer K. 2002. Uptake of prenatal screening for chromosomal anomalies: impact of test results in a previous pregnancy. Prenat Diagn 22: 1229-1232.
14. Tabor A, Phillip J, Madsen M, Bang J, Obel EB, Norgaard-Pedersen B. 1986. Randomised control trial of genetic amniocentesis in 4,606 low-risk women. Lancet i: 1287-1293.
15. Wald NJ, Huttly WJ, Hackshaw AK. 2003. Antenatal screening for Down's syndrome with the quadruple test. Lancet 361: 835-836.