利益相关者对英格兰囊性纤维化筛查方案中引入新一代测序的建议的看法

IF 4 Q1 GENETICS & HEREDITY International Journal of Neonatal Screening Pub Date : 2024-02-14 DOI:10.3390/ijns10010013
Pru Holder, Corinna C. Clark, L. Moody, F. Boardman, Jacqui Cowlard, Lorna Allen, Claire Walter, James R. Bonham, J. Chudleigh
{"title":"利益相关者对英格兰囊性纤维化筛查方案中引入新一代测序的建议的看法","authors":"Pru Holder, Corinna C. Clark, L. Moody, F. Boardman, Jacqui Cowlard, Lorna Allen, Claire Walter, James R. Bonham, J. Chudleigh","doi":"10.3390/ijns10010013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The project aimed to gather, analyse, and compare the views of stakeholders about the proposed UK cystic fibrosis (CF) screening protocol incorporating next generation sequencing (NGS). The study design was based on principles of Q-methodology with a willingness-to-pay exercise. Participants were recruited from 12 CF centres in the UK. The study contained twenty-eight adults who have experience with CF (parents of children with CF (n = 21), including parents of children with CF transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR)-related metabolic syndrome (CRMS)/CF screen positive—inconclusive diagnosis (CFSPID), an uncertain outcome (n = 3), and adults with CF (n = 4)), and nine health professionals involved in caring for children with CF. Parents and health professionals expressed a preference for a sensitive approach to NGS. This was influenced by the importance participants placed on not missing any children with CF via screening and the balance of harm between missing a case of CF compared to picking up more children with an uncertain outcome (CRMS/CFSPID). Given the preference for a sensitive approach, the need for adequate explanations about potential outcomes including uncertainty (CFSPID) at the time of screening was emphasized. More research is needed to inform definitive guidelines for managing children with an uncertain outcome following CF screening.","PeriodicalId":14159,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Neonatal Screening","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Stakeholder Views of the Proposed Introduction of Next Generation Sequencing into the Cystic Fibrosis Screening Protocol in England\",\"authors\":\"Pru Holder, Corinna C. Clark, L. Moody, F. Boardman, Jacqui Cowlard, Lorna Allen, Claire Walter, James R. Bonham, J. Chudleigh\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/ijns10010013\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The project aimed to gather, analyse, and compare the views of stakeholders about the proposed UK cystic fibrosis (CF) screening protocol incorporating next generation sequencing (NGS). The study design was based on principles of Q-methodology with a willingness-to-pay exercise. Participants were recruited from 12 CF centres in the UK. The study contained twenty-eight adults who have experience with CF (parents of children with CF (n = 21), including parents of children with CF transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR)-related metabolic syndrome (CRMS)/CF screen positive—inconclusive diagnosis (CFSPID), an uncertain outcome (n = 3), and adults with CF (n = 4)), and nine health professionals involved in caring for children with CF. Parents and health professionals expressed a preference for a sensitive approach to NGS. This was influenced by the importance participants placed on not missing any children with CF via screening and the balance of harm between missing a case of CF compared to picking up more children with an uncertain outcome (CRMS/CFSPID). Given the preference for a sensitive approach, the need for adequate explanations about potential outcomes including uncertainty (CFSPID) at the time of screening was emphasized. More research is needed to inform definitive guidelines for managing children with an uncertain outcome following CF screening.\",\"PeriodicalId\":14159,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Neonatal Screening\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Neonatal Screening\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/ijns10010013\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GENETICS & HEREDITY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Neonatal Screening","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/ijns10010013","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

该项目旨在收集、分析和比较利益相关者对英国囊性纤维化(CF)筛查方案(包含下一代测序(NGS))的建议的看法。研究设计基于 Q 方法学原则,并进行了支付意愿调查。参与者来自英国的 12 个 CF 中心。研究对象包括 28 名有 CF 经验的成年人(CF 患儿的父母(n = 21),包括 CF 跨膜传导调节器(CFTR)相关代谢综合征(CRMS)/CF 筛查阳性-确诊(CFSPID)、结果不确定(n = 3)和 CF 成人(n = 4)患儿的父母),以及 9 名参与照顾 CF 患儿的医疗专业人员。家长和医疗专业人员都表示倾向于对 NGS 采取敏感的方法。这主要是受以下因素的影响:参与者认为筛查不能遗漏任何 CF 儿童;遗漏一例 CF 病例与发现更多结果不确定(CRMS/CFSPID)的儿童之间的危害平衡。鉴于与会者倾向于采用敏感的方法,因此强调在筛查时需要充分解释潜在的结果,包括不确定性(CFSPID)。需要进行更多的研究,为管理 CF 筛查后结果不确定的儿童提供明确的指导原则。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Stakeholder Views of the Proposed Introduction of Next Generation Sequencing into the Cystic Fibrosis Screening Protocol in England
The project aimed to gather, analyse, and compare the views of stakeholders about the proposed UK cystic fibrosis (CF) screening protocol incorporating next generation sequencing (NGS). The study design was based on principles of Q-methodology with a willingness-to-pay exercise. Participants were recruited from 12 CF centres in the UK. The study contained twenty-eight adults who have experience with CF (parents of children with CF (n = 21), including parents of children with CF transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR)-related metabolic syndrome (CRMS)/CF screen positive—inconclusive diagnosis (CFSPID), an uncertain outcome (n = 3), and adults with CF (n = 4)), and nine health professionals involved in caring for children with CF. Parents and health professionals expressed a preference for a sensitive approach to NGS. This was influenced by the importance participants placed on not missing any children with CF via screening and the balance of harm between missing a case of CF compared to picking up more children with an uncertain outcome (CRMS/CFSPID). Given the preference for a sensitive approach, the need for adequate explanations about potential outcomes including uncertainty (CFSPID) at the time of screening was emphasized. More research is needed to inform definitive guidelines for managing children with an uncertain outcome following CF screening.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Neonatal Screening
International Journal of Neonatal Screening Medicine-Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
20.00%
发文量
56
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊最新文献
Incidence of Inborn Errors of Metabolism and Endocrine Disorders Among 40965 Newborn Infants at Riyadh Second Health Cluster of the Ministry of Health Saudi Arabia. A Systematic Literature Review on the Global Status of Newborn Screening for Mucopolysaccharidosis II. The Value of Reducing Inconclusive and False-Positive Newborn Screening Results for Congenital Hypothyroidism, Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia and Maple Syrup Urine Disease in The Netherlands. Newborn Screening for Sickle Cell Disease in Catalonia between 2015 and 2022-Epidemiology and Impact on Clinical Events. Prevalence and Mutation Analysis of Short-Chain acyl-CoA Dehydrogenase Deficiency Detected by Newborn Screening in Hefei, China.
×
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