Non-invasive prenatal screening: Testing motivations and decision making in the low-risk population.

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 GENETICS & HEREDITY Journal of Genetic Counseling Pub Date : 2024-05-23 DOI:10.1002/jgc4.1921
Jenna K Lea, Blair K Stevens, Shannon Mulligan, Syed S Hashmi, Rebecca Lunstroth, Meagan G Choates
{"title":"Non-invasive prenatal screening: Testing motivations and decision making in the low-risk population.","authors":"Jenna K Lea, Blair K Stevens, Shannon Mulligan, Syed S Hashmi, Rebecca Lunstroth, Meagan G Choates","doi":"10.1002/jgc4.1921","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Non-invasive prenatal screening provides a risk assessment for aneuploidies by utilizing cell-free DNA (cfDNA). It is recommended that cell-free DNA screening (cfDNA screening) be offered to all pregnant people regardless of a priori risk for aneuploidy. In the absence of an increased risk, alternative motives for electing cfDNA screening and different levels of informed decision making may arise. Therefore, our study aimed to characterize low-risk patients' motivations for cfDNA screening election, determine how often informed decisions are being made, and compare motivations between informed and uninformed decision makers. A survey that included a modified, validated measure of informed choice (MMIC) and questions to assess patients' motivations for cfDNA screening was offered at four MFM clinics following genetic counseling. It was found that 44% of participants (n = 100) made an uninformed decision about testing. Participants with private insurers were 4.25 times more likely to make an informed decision (95% CI = 1.10-16.37). Informed decision makers scored avoiding invasive procedures higher (p = 0.007) and ranked doing what family/friends desire lower (p = 0.005) than uninformed decision makers. While most participants scored receiving information about genetic conditions highest, 12% of participants reported fetal sex disclosure as a priority. However, this was not found to be associated with uninformed decision making. This study ultimately established that following genetic counseling, a low-risk population shared motivations with high-risk populations which highlights the importance of complete pre-test counseling for all. Future research should investigate the effect of modifying variables, such as socioeconomic status, on the performance of informed choice measures and critically evaluate the parameters that determine informed choice.</p>","PeriodicalId":54829,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Genetic Counseling","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Genetic Counseling","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jgc4.1921","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Non-invasive prenatal screening provides a risk assessment for aneuploidies by utilizing cell-free DNA (cfDNA). It is recommended that cell-free DNA screening (cfDNA screening) be offered to all pregnant people regardless of a priori risk for aneuploidy. In the absence of an increased risk, alternative motives for electing cfDNA screening and different levels of informed decision making may arise. Therefore, our study aimed to characterize low-risk patients' motivations for cfDNA screening election, determine how often informed decisions are being made, and compare motivations between informed and uninformed decision makers. A survey that included a modified, validated measure of informed choice (MMIC) and questions to assess patients' motivations for cfDNA screening was offered at four MFM clinics following genetic counseling. It was found that 44% of participants (n = 100) made an uninformed decision about testing. Participants with private insurers were 4.25 times more likely to make an informed decision (95% CI = 1.10-16.37). Informed decision makers scored avoiding invasive procedures higher (p = 0.007) and ranked doing what family/friends desire lower (p = 0.005) than uninformed decision makers. While most participants scored receiving information about genetic conditions highest, 12% of participants reported fetal sex disclosure as a priority. However, this was not found to be associated with uninformed decision making. This study ultimately established that following genetic counseling, a low-risk population shared motivations with high-risk populations which highlights the importance of complete pre-test counseling for all. Future research should investigate the effect of modifying variables, such as socioeconomic status, on the performance of informed choice measures and critically evaluate the parameters that determine informed choice.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
无创产前筛查:低风险人群的检测动机和决策。
无创产前筛查利用无细胞 DNA(cfDNA)对非整倍体进行风险评估。建议为所有孕妇提供无细胞 DNA 筛查(cfDNA 筛查),无论其先验性是否有非整倍体风险。在没有增加风险的情况下,可能会出现选择 cfDNA 筛查的其他动机和不同程度的知情决策。因此,我们的研究旨在描述低风险患者选择 cfDNA 筛查的动机,确定知情决策的频率,并比较知情决策者和非知情决策者的动机。四家妇产科诊所在遗传咨询后进行了一项调查,调查内容包括经过修改和验证的知情选择测量法(MMIC)和评估患者进行 cfDNA 筛查动机的问题。结果发现,44% 的参与者(n = 100)对检测做出了不知情的决定。拥有私人保险公司的参与者做出知情决定的可能性要高出 4.25 倍(95% CI = 1.10-16.37)。与不知情的决策者相比,知情决策者对避免侵入性程序的评分更高(p = 0.007),对按照家人/朋友的意愿行事的评分更低(p = 0.005)。虽然大多数参与者对获得遗传病信息的评分最高,但也有 12% 的参与者将披露胎儿性别列为优先事项。然而,研究并未发现这与不知情的决策者有关。这项研究最终确定,在接受遗传咨询后,低风险人群与高风险人群的动机是一致的,这突出了为所有人提供完整的检测前咨询的重要性。未来的研究应调查社会经济地位等可变因素对知情选择测量结果的影响,并对决定知情选择的参数进行严格评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Genetic Counseling
Journal of Genetic Counseling GENETICS & HEREDITY-
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
26.30%
发文量
113
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Genetic Counseling (JOGC), published for the National Society of Genetic Counselors, is a timely, international forum addressing all aspects of the discipline and practice of genetic counseling. The journal focuses on the critical questions and problems that arise at the interface between rapidly advancing technological developments and the concerns of individuals and communities at genetic risk. The publication provides genetic counselors, other clinicians and health educators, laboratory geneticists, bioethicists, legal scholars, social scientists, and other researchers with a premier resource on genetic counseling topics in national, international, and cross-national contexts.
期刊最新文献
The current landscape of clinical exome and genome reanalysis in the U.S. A cross-sectional survey-based exploration of diversity in the admissions committees and student cohorts of genetic counseling programs over time. An analysis of direct-to-consumer genetic testing portals and their communication of health risk and test limitations. Patient perceptions of genetic counselors' role and emotional support needs in adults with Parkinson's disease Clinical genetic counselors' use of people‐ and identity‐first language in regard to patients' identification with disability
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1