Interpretations of informed choice in antenatal screening: A cross-cultural, Q-methodology study

Social Science and Medicine

Volumn 74, Issue 7, 2012, Pages 997-1004

  Ahmed, Shenaz ^a   Bryant, Louise D ^a   Tizro, Zahra ^b   Shickle, Darren ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

^b YORK ST JOHN UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Antenatal screening; Autonomy; Cross cultural; Informed choice; Multiethnic; U.K.

Indexed keywords

AUTONOMY; ETHICS; HEALTH CARE; METHODOLOGY; MULTICULTURALISM;

ADULT; ARTICLE; BRITISH; CAUCASIAN; CENTRAL AMERICA; CHINESE; CONTROLLED STUDY; CULTURAL FACTOR; ETHNIC DIFFERENCE; ETHNIC GROUP; FEMALE; GENETIC DISORDER; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HUMAN; INFORMED CONSENT; LINGUISTICS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MEDICAL RESEARCH; NEGRO; PAKISTANI; PATIENT AUTONOMY; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PRENATAL CARE; PRENATAL SCREENING; Q FACTOR ANALYSIS; Q METHODOLOGY; Q SORT; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; UNITED KINGDOM;

CROSS-CULTURAL COMPARISON; DECISION MAKING; FACTOR ANALYSIS, STATISTICAL; GREAT BRITAIN; HEALTH SERVICES ACCESSIBILITY; HUMANS; INFORMED CONSENT; PERSONAL AUTONOMY; PHYSICIAN-PATIENT RELATIONS; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; QUALITY OF HEALTH CARE;

UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 84857913732     PISSN: 02779536     EISSN: 18735347     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.12.021     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Ahmed S., Green J., Hewison J. Antenatal thalassaemia carrier testing: women's perceptions of "information" and "consent" Journal of Medical Screening 2005, 12(2):69-77.
2. Ahmed S., Hewison J., Green J.M., Cuckle H.S., Hirst J., Thornton J.G. Decisions about testing and termination of pregnancy for different fetal conditions: a qualitative study of European White and Pakistani mothers of affected children. Journal of Genetic Counseling 2008, 17(6):560-572.
3. Barnett J., Ogden J., Daniells E. The value of choice: a qualitative study. British Journal of General Practice 2008, 58(554):609-613.
4. Birbili M. Translating from one language to another. Social Research Update 2000, 31:1-7.
5. Bowman K.W., Hui E.C. Bioethics for clinicians: 20. Chinese bioethics. Canadian Medical Association Journal 2000, 163(11):1481-1485.
6. Brown S.R. Political subjectivity: Applications of Q methodology in political science 1980, Yale University Press, New Haven.
7. Brown S.R. A primer on Q methodology. Operant Subjectivity 1993, 16:91-138.
8. Brown S. Q Methodology and qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research 1996, 4:561-567.
9. Bryant L.D., Green J.M., Hewison J. Understandings of Down's syndrome: a Q methodological investigation. Social Science & Medicine 2006, 63(5):1188-1200.
10. Cong Y. Doctor-family-patient relationship: the Chinese paradigm of informed consent. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 2004, 29(2):149-178.
11. Deber R.B., Kraetschmer N., Irvine J. What role do patients wish to play in treatment decision making?. Archives of Internal Medicine 1996, 156:1414-1420.
12. Deber R.B., Kraetschmer N., Urowitz S., Sharpe N. Do people want to be autonomous patients? Preferred roles in treatment decision-making in several patient populations. Health Expectations 2007, 10(3):248-258.
13. Elliott A.C. Health care ethics: cultural relativity of autonomy. Journal of Transcultural Nursing 2001, 12(4):326-330.
14. EUROCAT Central Registry. (2010). EUROCAT special report: prenatal screening policies in Europe 2010. University of Ulster.
15. Fagan A. Challenging the bioethical application of the autonomy principle within multicultural societies. Journal of Applied Philosophy 2004, 21(1):15-31.
16. General Medical Council Seeking patients' consent: The ethical considerations 1998, GMC, London.
17. Green J.M., Hewison J., Bekker H.L., Bryant L.D., Cuckle H.S. Psychosocial aspects of genetic screening of pregnant women and newborns: a systematic review. Health Technology Assessment 2004, 8(33).
18. Hall S., Chitty L., Dormandy E., Hollywood A., Wildschut H.I., Fortuny A., et al. Undergoing prenatal screening for Down's syndrome: presentation of choice and information in Europe and Asia. European Journal of Human Genetics 2007, 15:563-569.
19. van den Heuvel A., Chitty L., Dormandy E., Newson A., Attwood S., Ma R., et al. Is informed choice in prenatal testing universally valued? A population-based survey in Europe and Asia. BJOG 2009, 116(7):880-885.
20. Hofstede G. Culture's consequences: International differences in work related values 1988, Sage Publication, Beverly Hills, CA.
21. Iyengar S.S., Lepper M.R. Rethinking the value of choice: a cultural perspective on intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1999, 76(3):349-366.
22. Jafarey A.M., Farooqui A. Informed consent in the Pakistani milieu: the physician's perspective. Journal of Medical Ethics 2005, 31(2):93-96.
23. Kagu M.B., Abjah U.A., Ahmed S.G. Awareness and acceptability of prenatal diagnosis of sickle cell anaemia among health professionals and students in North Eastern Nigeria. Nigerian Journal of Medicine 2004, 13(1):48-51.
24. Kitzinger C. The social construct of Lesbianism 1987, Sage, Bristol.
25. Lawson K.L., Pierson R.A. Maternal decisions regarding prenatal diagnosis: rational choices or sensible decisions?. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada 2007, 29(3):240-246.
26. Moazam F. Families, patients, and physicians in medical decision making: a Pakistani perspective. Hastings Centre Reports 2000, 30(6):28-37.
27. NHS FASP Fetal Anomaly Screening Programme 2010.
28. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence [NICE] NICE clinical guideline 62. Antenatal care: Routine care for the healthy pregnant woman 2008.
29. O'Connor A.M., Bennett C.L., Stacey D., Barry M., Col N.F., Eden K.B., et al. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Systematic Reviews 2009, (3):CD001431.
30. Prasad R.S. Development of the HIV/AIDS Q-sort instrument to measure physician attitudes. Family Medicine 2001, 33(10):772-778.
31. Robinson A., Thomson R. Variability in patient preferences for participating in medical decision making: implication for the use of decision support tools. Quality in Health Care 2001, 10(Suppl. 1):i34-i38.
32. Rowe H.J., Fisher J.R., Quinlivan J.A. Are pregnant Australian women well informed about prenatal genetic screening? A systematic investigation using the multidimensional measure of informed choice. Australian New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 2006, 46(5):433-439.
33. Stainton Rogers W. Explaining health and illness: An exploration of diversity 1991, Harvester Wheatsheaf, Brighton.
34. Stainton Rogers W. Q methodology. Rethinking methods in psychology 1995, 178-192. Sage, London. J.A. Smith, L. Van Langenhove (Eds.).
35. Stenner P.H., Bianchi G., Popper M., Supekova M., Luksik I., Pujol J. Constructions of sexual relationships: a study of the views of young people in Catalunia, England and Slovakia and their health implications. Journal of Health Psychology 2006, 11:669-684.
36. Stenner P.H., Cooper D., Skevington S.M. Putting the Q into quality of life; the identification of subjective constructions of health-related quality of life using Q methodology. Social Science & Medicine 2003, 57(11):2161-2172.
37. Taylor I. Some patients are happy for doctors to make decisions. British Medical Journal 2000, 320:58.
38. Watts S., Stenner P. Doing Q methodology: theory, method, and interpretation. Qualitative Research in Psychology 2005, 2:67-91.
39. Williams C., Alderson P., Farsides B. Is nondirectiveness possible within the context of antenatal screening and testing?. Social Science & Medicine 2002, 54(3):339-347.
40. World Health Organization Medical genetic services in developing countries: The ethical, legal and social implications of genetic testing and screening 2006.