Women and their partners' preferences for Down's syndrome screening tests: A discrete choice experiment

Prenatal Diagnosis

Volumn 33, Issue 5, 2013, Pages 449-456

  Carroll, Fran E ^a   Al Janabi, Hareth ^b   Flynn, Terry ^c   Montgomery, Alan A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE TO ILLNESS; DECISION MAKING; DOWN SYNDROME; FEMALE; GESTATIONAL AGE; HEALTH CARE COST; HUMAN; MALE; PREGNANCY; PREGNANT WOMAN; PRENATAL SCREENING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUESTIONNAIRE;

ADULT; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; DOWN SYNDROME; FEMALE; GENETIC TESTING; GESTATIONAL AGE; HUMANS; MALE; PATIENT PREFERENCE; PREGNANCY; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; QUESTIONNAIRES; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SPOUSES;

EID: 84877627640     PISSN: 01973851     EISSN: 10970223     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/pd.4086     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Street RL, Elwyn G, Epstein RM. Patient preferences and healthcare outcomes: an ecological perspective. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 2012;12:167-80.
2. Boyd PA, DeVigan C, Khoshnood B, et al. Survey of prenatal screening policies in Europe for structural malformations and chromosome anomalies, and their impact on detection and termination rates for neural tube defects and Down's syndrome. BJOG 2008;115:689-96.
3. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 77: Screening for Fetal Chromosomal Abnormalities. Obstet Gynecol 2007;109:217-27.
4. National Institute for Clinical Excellence and National Collaborating Centre for Women's and Children's Health Antenatal Care: Routine Care for the Healthy Pregnant Woman - Clinical Guideline [WWW document]. URL http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/pdf/CG62FullGuidelineCorrectedJune2008July2009.pdf [first accessed on 13 January 2010].
5. U.K. National Screening Committee. Testing for Down's Syndrome in Pregnancy. In Screening Tests for You and Your Baby, 2008;16-31.
6. U.K. National Screening Committee. Fetal anomoly screening programme - screening for Down's Syndrome: UK NSC policy recommendations 2011-2014 model of best practice. [first accessed on 28 May 2012].
7. Dormandy E, Hooper R, Michie S, et al. 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. J Med Screen 2002;9:109-14.
8. Michie S, Dormandy E, Marteau TM. The multi-dimensional measure of informed choice: a validation study. Patient Educ Couns 2002;48:87-91.
9. Favre R, Moutel G, Duchange N, et al. What about Informed Consent in First-Trimester Ultrasound Screening for Down Syndrome? Fetal Diagn Ther 2008;23:173-84.
10. Rowe H, Fisher J, Quinlivan J. Are pregnant women well informed about prenatal genetic screening? A systematic investigation using the Multidimensional Measure of Informed Choice. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2006;46:433-9.
11. van den Berg M, Timmermans DRM, ten Kate LP, et al. Informed decision making in the context of prenatal screening. Patient Educ Couns 2006;63:110-7.
12. Marlen HMHJ, Wildschut HIJ, Essink-Bot ML, et al. Prenatal screening for Down's syndrome; low uptake rates are based on informed decision making. J Psychosom Obstet Gynecol 2010;31:65-65.
13. Jaques A, Bell R, Watson L, et al. People who influence women's decisions and preferred sources of information about prenatal testing for birth defects. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2004;44:233-8.
14. Nazaré B, Fonseca A, Gameiro S, et al. Amniocentesis Due to Advanced Maternal Age: The Role of Marital Intimacy in Couples' Decision-Making Process. Contemp Fam Ther 2011;33:128-42.
15. Carroll JC, Brown JB, Reid AJ, et al. Women's experience of maternal serum screening. Can Fam Physician 2000;46:614-20.
16. Kukulu K, Buldukoglu K, Keser I, et al. Psychological effects of amniocentesis on women and their spouses: Importance of the testing period and genetic counseling. J Psychosom Obstet Gynecol 2006;27:9-15.
17. Sjögren B. The expectant father and prenatal diagnosis. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol 1992;13:197-208.
18. Petrou S, McIntosh E. Women's Preferences for Attributes of First-Trimester Miscarriage Management: A Stated Preference Discrete-Choice Experiment. Value Health 2009;12:551-9.
19. McFadden D, Zarembka P. Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. In Frontiers in econometrics. New York: Academic Press, 1974;105-42.
20. Thurstone LL. A law of comparative judgment. Psychol Rev 1994;101:266-70.
21. Louviere J, Street D, Burgess L. A 20+ years retrospective on choice experiments. In Marketing Research and Modeling: Progress and Prospects, Wind Y, Green PE (eds.). New York: Kluwer, 2003:201-14.
22. Louviere JJ, Woodworth G. Design and Analysis of Simulated Consumer Choice or Allocation Experiments: An Approach Based on Aggregate Data. J Market Res 1983;20:350-67.
23. de Bekker-Grob EW, Hofman R, Donkers B, et al. Girls' preferences for HPV vaccination: A discrete choice experiment. Vaccine 2010;28:6692-7.
24. Hall J, Fiebig DG, King MT, et al. What influences participation in genetic carrier testing? Results from a discrete choice experiment. J Health Econ 2006;25:520-37.
25. Kimman ML, Dellaert BGC, Boersma LJ, et al. Follow-up after treatment for breast cancer: One strategy fits all? An investigation of patient preferences using a discrete choice experiment. Acta Oncol 2010;49:328-37.
26. Muhlbacher AC, Rudolph I, Lincke HJ, et al. Preferences for treatment of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD): a discrete choice experiment. BMC Health Serv Res 2009;9:149-59.
27. Ryan M, Diack J, Watson V, et al. Rapid prenatal diagnostic testing for Down syndrome only or longer wait for full karyotype: the views of pregnant women. Prenat Diagn 2005;25:1206-11.
28. Chan YM, Sahota DS, Leung TY, et al. Chinese women's preferences for prenatal diagnostic procedures and their willingness to trade between procedures. Prenat Diagn 2009;29:1270-6.
29. Bishop AJ, Marteau T, Armstrong D, et al. Women and health care professionals' preferences for Down's Syndrome screening tests: a conjoint analysis study. BJOG 2004;111:775-9.
30. Lewis SM, Cullinane FM, Carlin JB, et al. Women's and health professionals' preferences for prenatal testing for Down syndrome in Australia. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2006;46:205-11.
31. Lewis SM, Cullinane FN, Bishop AJ, et al. A comparison of Australian and UK obstetricians' and midwives' preferences for screening tests for Down syndrome. Prenat Diagn 2006;26:60-6.
32. Coast J, Horrocks S. Developing attributes and levels for discrete choice experiments using qualitative methods. J Health Serv Res Policy 2007;12:25-30.
33. Carroll FE, Owen-Smith A, Shaw A, et al. A qualitative investigation of the decision-making process of couples considering prenatal screening for Down syndrome. Prenat Diagn 2012;32:57-63.
34. Ritchie J, Spencer L, O'Connor W. Carrying out qualitative analysis. In Qualitative Research Practice: A Guide For Social Science Students and Researchers, Ritchie J, Lewis J (eds.). London: Sage, 2003;219-63.
35. Marshall D, Bridges JFP, Hauber B, et al. Conjoint Analysis Applications in Health - How are Studies being Designed and Reported?: An Update on Current Practice in the Published Literature between 2005 and 2008. Patient 2010;3:249-56.
36. Sloane NA. Library of Orthogonal Arrays [WWW document]. URL http://www2.research.att.com/~njas/oadir/
37. Flynn TN, Louviere JJ, Peters TJ, et al. Using discrete choice experiments to understand preferences for quality of life. Variance-scale heterogeneity matters. Soc Sci Med 2010;70:1957-65.
38. Hole AR. A comparison of approaches to estimating confidence intervals for willingness to pay measures. Health Econ 2007;16:827-40.
39. Lancsar E, Savage E. Deriving welfare measures from discrete choice experiments: inconsistency between current methods and random utility and welfare theory. Health Econ 2004;13:901-7.
40. Kornman LH, Wortelboer MJM, Beekhuis JR, et al. Women's opinions and the implications of first- versus second-trimester screening for fetal Down's syndrome. Prenat Diagn 1997;17:1011-8.
41. Seror V, Ville Y. Prenatal screening for Down syndrome: women's involvement in decision-making and their attitudes to screening. Prenat Diagn 2009;29:120-8.
42. Coast J, Al-Janabi H, Sutton EJ, et al. Using qualitative methods for attribute development for discrete choice experiments: issues and recommendations. Health Econ 2012;21:730-41.
43. Garrouste C, Le J, Maurin E. The choice of detecting down syndrome: does money matter? Health Econ 2011;20:1073-89.
44. Tapon D. Prenatal Testing for Down Syndrome: Comparison of Screening Practices in the UK and USA. J Genet Couns 2010;19:112-30.
45. McIntosh E, Clarke P, Frew E, et al. Applied methods of cost-benefit analysis in health care. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010:108.
46. U.K. National Screening Committee. Fetal anomoly screening programme - screening for Down's Syndrome: UK NSC policy recommendations 2007-2010: model of best practice [WWW document]. URL www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_084732 [first accessed on 13 January 2010].