A qualitative study looking at informed choice in the context of non-invasive prenatal testing for aneuploidy

Prenatal Diagnosis

Volumn 36, Issue 9, 2016, Pages 875-881

  Lewis, Celine ^a   Hill, Melissa ^a   Chitty, Lyn S ^a  

^a GREAT ORMOND STREET HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AMBIVALENCE; ANEUPLOIDY; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; COPING BEHAVIOR; DOWN SYNDROME; EDWARDS SYNDROME; FEMALE; HUMAN; INFORMED DECISION MAKING; NON INVASIVE PROCEDURE; PATIENT ATTITUDE; PATIENT DECISION MAKING; PERSONAL EXPERIENCE; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; QUALITY OF LIFE; TELEPHONE INTERVIEW; TRISOMY 13;

EID: 84986631553     PISSN: 01973851     EISSN: 10970223     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/pd.4879     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. UK National Screening Committee. New screening tests for you and your baby, 2014.
2. Vassy C, Rosman S, Rousseau B. From policy making to service use. Down syndrome antenatal screening in England, France and the Netherlands. Soc Sci Med 2014;106:67–74.
3. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG practice bulletin no. 77: screening for fetal chromosomal abnormalities. Obstet Gynecol 2007;109:217–27.
4. Gil MM, Quezada MS, Revello R, et al. Analysis of cell-free DNA in maternal blood in screening for fetal aneuploidies: updated meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2015;45:249–66.
5. Royal College Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Non-invasive prenatal testing for chromosomal abnormality using maternal plasma DNA. RCOG Scientific Impact Paper No 15, 2014.
6. National Screening Committee. Annual report: screening in England. London, 2011–12.
7. Dormandy E, Tsui EY, Marteau TM. Development of a measure of informed choice suitable for use in low literacy populations. Patient Educ Couns 2007;66:278–95.
8. Bangsgaard L, Tabor A. Do pregnant women and their partners make an informed choice about first trimester risk assessment for Down syndrome, and are they satisfied with the choice? Prenat Diagn 2013;33:146–52.
9. Gourounti K, Sandall J. Do pregnant women in Greece make informed choices about antenatal screening for Down syndrome? A questionnaire survey. Midwifery 2008;24:153–62.
10. van denBerg M, Timmermans DR, Ten Kate LP, et al. Are pregnant women making informed choices about prenatal screening? Genet Med 2005;7:332–8.
11. Deans Z, Newson AJ. Should non-invasiveness change informed consent procedures for prenatal diagnosis? Health Care Anal 2011;19:122–32.
12. Lewis C, Silcock C, Chitty LS. Non-invasive prenatal testing for Down syndrome – pregnant women's views and likely uptake. Public Health Genomics 2013;16:223–32.
13. Wright CF, Chitty LS. Cell-free fetal DNA and RNA in maternal blood: implications for safer antenatal testing. BMJ 2009;339:b2451.
14. Marteau TM, Dormandy E, Michie S. A measure of informed choice. Health Expect 2001;4:99–108.
15. Lewis C, Hill M, Skirton H, et al. Development and validation of a measure of informed choice for women undergoing non-invasive prenatal testing for aneuploidy. Eur J Hum Genet 2015;24:809–16.
16. Bekker H, Thornton JG, Airey CM, et al. Informed decision making: an annotated bibliography and systematic review. Health Technol Assess 1999;3:1–156.
17. Hill M, Wright D, Daley R, et al. Evaluation of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for aneuploidy in an NHS setting: a reliable accurate prenatal non-invasive diagnosis (RAPID) protocol. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2014;14:229–39.
18. Lewis C, Hill M, Chitty L. Women's experience and preferences for service delivery of non-invasive prenatal testing for aneuploidy in a public health setting: a mixed methods study. PLoS One 2016;11:e0153147.
19. Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol 2006;3:77–101.
20. Piechan JL, Hines KA, Koller DL, et al. NIPT and informed consent: an assessment of patient understanding of a negative NIPT result. J Genet Couns 2016 April 1 [Epub ahead of print].
21. Farrell R, Hawkins A, Barragan D, et al. Knowledge, understanding and uptake of non-invasive prenatal testing among Latina women. Prenat Diagn 2015;35:748–53.
22. Lazarus RS, Folkman S. Stress, Appraisal and Coping. Springer: New York; 1984.
23. Elwyn G, Miron-Shatz T. Deliberation before determination: the definition and evaluation of good decision making. Health Expect 2010;13:139–47.
24. van denBerg M, Timmermans DR, tenKate LP, et al. Informed decision making in the context of prenatal screening. Patient Educ Couns 2006;63:110–17.
25. Brookfield SD. Adult learning: an overview. In International Encyclopedia of Education and Training, Tuijman AC (ed), 2nd ed. Pergamon Press: Tarrytown; 1996.
26. Lewis C, Hill M, Silcock C, et al. Non-invasive prenatal testing for trisomy 21: a cross sectional survey of service users' views and likely uptake. BJOG 2014;121:582–94.
27. Choi H, Van Riper M, Thoyre S. Decision making following a prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome: an integrative review. J Midwifery Womens Health 2012;57:156–64.
28. Etchegary H, Potter B, Howley H, et al. The influence of experiential knowledge on prenatal screening and testing decisions. Genet Test 2008;12:115–24.
29. Garcia E, Timmermans DR, vanLeeuwen E. The impact of ethical beliefs on decisions about prenatal screening tests: searching for justification. Soc Sci Med 2008;66:753–64.
30. Archibald AD, McClaren BJ. Perceived relevance of genetic carrier screening: observations of the role of health-related life experiences and stage of life in decision making. J Community Genet 2012;3:47–54.
31. Norton ME, Jacobsson B, Swamy GK, et al. Cell-free DNA analysis for noninvasive examination of trisomy. N Engl J Med 2015;372:1589–97.
32. Lewis C, Choudhury M, Chitty LS. 'Hope for safe prenatal gene tests'. A content analysis of how the UK press media are reporting advances in non-invasive prenatal testing. Prenat Diagn 2014;35:420–27.
33. Skirton H, Goldsmith L, Jackson L, et al. Non-invasive prenatal testing for aneuploidy: a systematic review of Internet advertising to potential users by commercial companies and private health providers. Prenat Diagn 2015;35:1167–75.