Women's preferences in screening for Down syndrome

被引:7
|
作者
Deverill, Mark
Robson, Stephen
机构
[1] Newcastle Univ, Ctr Hlth Serv Res, Sch Populat & Hlth Sci, Newcastle Upon Tyne NE2 4AA, Tyne & Wear, England
[2] Newcastle Univ, Sch Med, Sch Surg & Reprod Sci Obstet & Gynaecol, Newcastle Upon Tyne NE2 4AA, Tyne & Wear, England
关键词
prenatal screening; Down syndrome; women's preferences;
D O I
10.1002/pd.1517
中图分类号
Q3 [遗传学];
学科分类号
071007 ; 090102 ;
摘要
Objectives In this article, we seek to establish women's preferences (expressed as utility values) for a number of scenarios relating to the process and associated outcomes of first- and second-trimester screening for Down syndrome. Methods We used the standard gamble (SG) approach with a sample of 100 pregnant women. Standard gamble is a choice-based preference elicitation technique that values scenarios on a 0-1 scale. Results A true negative screening test, whether obtained in the first or second trimester, had the highest utility scores (both 0.98), which were not significantly different from the scores for the false-positive scenarios leading to first- or second-trimester invasive testing but the birth of a healthy infant (0.95 and 0.94, respectively). The mean utility score for the false-negative scenario resulting in the birth of a Down syndrome infant (0.77) was lower than both the true negative scenarios and the false-positive healthy baby scenarios (p < 0.000). Conclusion We did not find any differences in the values of the key scenarios regarding either the timing of reassurance of a healthy fetus or the ability to access early surgical termination, rather than later medical termination for a Down syndrome fetus. Copyright (c) 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
引用
收藏
页码:837 / 841
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Preimplantation genetic screening as an alternative to prenatal testing for Down syndrome: preferences of women undergoing in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection treatment
    Twisk, Moniek
    Haadsma, Maaike L.
    van der Veen, Fulco
    Repping, Sjoerd
    Mastenbroek, Sebastiaan
    Heineman, Maas-Jan
    Bossuyt, Patrick M. M.
    Korevaar, Johanna C.
    FERTILITY AND STERILITY, 2007, 88 (04) : 804 - 810
  • [22] Down Syndrome Screening in India: Are We There Yet?
    Manikandan K.
    Seshadri S.
    The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India, 2017, 67 (6) : 393 - 399
  • [23] Screening for Down syndrome at 14 weeks of pregnancy
    Wald, NJ
    Watt, HC
    Haddow, JE
    Knight, GJ
    PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS, 1998, 18 (03) : 291 - 293
  • [24] Serological prenatal screening and diagnosis for Down syndrome
    Duan, Y.
    Li, Y.
    Xue, Q.
    CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY, 2014, 41 (05): : 572 - 574
  • [25] Prenatal screening, ethics and Down's syndrome: A literature review
    Alderson, P
    NURSING ETHICS, 2001, 8 (04) : 360 - 374
  • [26] Informed choice in women attending private clinics to undergo first-trimester screening for Down syndrome
    Jaques, AM
    Sheffield, LJ
    Halliday, JL
    PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS, 2005, 25 (08) : 656 - 664
  • [27] Biochemical screening for Down syndrome
    Cuckle, H
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS GYNECOLOGY AND REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY, 2000, 92 (01): : 97 - 101
  • [28] Evolution in screening for Down syndrome
    Al Mahri, Ghalia Ashoor
    Nicolaides, K. H.
    OBSTETRICIAN & GYNAECOLOGIST, 2019, 21 (01): : 51 - 57
  • [29] The quadruple test for Down syndrome screening in pregnant women of advanced maternal age
    Kwon, Ji Young
    Park, In Yang
    Kwon, Seong-min
    Kim, Chan Joo
    Shin, Jong Chul
    ARCHIVES OF GYNECOLOGY AND OBSTETRICS, 2012, 285 (03) : 629 - 633
  • [30] A survey of the knowledge and attitudes of pregnant Thai women towards Down syndrome screening
    Pruksanusak, Ninlapa
    Suwanrath, Chitkasaem
    Kor-anantakul, Ounjai
    Prasartwanakit, Visit
    Leetanaporn, Roengsak
    Suntharasaj, Thitima
    Hanprasertpong, Tharangrut
    JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY RESEARCH, 2009, 35 (05) : 876 - 881