How do prospective parents prefer to receive information about prenatal screening and diagnostic testing? Short title: Preferences for receiving prenatal testing information. A M Willis*1, 2, S Smith*1, B Meiser1, C Muller3, S Lewis3,4, J Halliday 3,4 (*joint first authors) 1
Prince of Wales Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia;
2
Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia; 3Murdoch Children’s
Research Institute, Royal Children’s Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; 4Department of Paediatrics, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia Corresponding author: Amanda Willis, Psychosocial Research Group, Prince of Wales Clinical School, Level 4 Lowy Cancer Research Centre C25, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052 Australia. Telephone: +61-406-138-684, email: [email protected] Funding statement: This study was supported by the Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales. Associate Professor Bettina Meiser is supported by a Career Development Award Level 2 from the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia (NHMRC). Doctor Sian Smith is supported by an Early Career Fellowship from the NHMRC. Professor Jane Halliday is supported by a Senior Research Fellowship from the NHMRC (1021252).
This article has been accepted for publication and undergone full peer review but has not been through the copyediting, typesetting, pagination and proofreading process which may lead to differences between this version and the Version of Record. Please cite this article as doi: 10.1002/pd.4493
This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Disclosures: None declared. Manuscript word count: 1 499 Table count: 1 Figure count: 1 What’s already known about this topic? •
Women prefer to receive information about prenatal testing options face-to-face from a health professional.
•
Increasing numbers of people are accessing health-related information online.
What does this study add? •
In spite of increased online access of health information, both women and partners still prefer to receive information about prenatal testing options face-to-face.
•
High rates of information seeking were observed among pregnant women and partners, despite seemingly high satisfaction with information provided.
This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Prenatal screening is now widely available to all women regardless of age. Given the potential benefits and limitations of prenatal screening with follow up diagnostic testing 1, 2 it is imperative that women make an informed choice. Although pregnant women feel primarily responsible for decisions about prenatal testing, with input from their partners, 3 studies still show a lack of consistency in information provided,4 inequality of access to information,5 unmet support and information needs and limited knowledge of prenatal testing technologies among pregnant women.6 Face-to-face delivery has traditionally been the preferred method of information delivery among prospective parents, with paper-based information also popular.3-5 However, options for information delivery are now much broader due to increased online access of healthrelated information and willingness of patients to access services, networking and support online.2, 7 Since the last study comparing preferences for receiving prenatal testing information was published close to a decade ago,3 and there is a shortage of studies addressing the information needs and preferences of the couple as a unit and partners specifically,8 an updated view is required. This study aims to provide an up-to-date assessment of prospective parents’ preferences for receiving information about prenatal testing and examine whether information needs are currently being met. Pregnant women and their partners were recruited from a tertiary level public hospital and a private hospital in Melbourne, Australia, between December 2012 and April 2013. Couples were approached when attending the hospital for either the glucose challenge test or childbirth education classes (women approached were 24-35 weeks gestation). Couples were eligible if they were 18 years or over and proficient in English. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Women and their partners were either given a hard-copy study pack (consent form, participant information sheet and questionnaire), or provided their email address to receive electronic copies. Women attending alone were given a study pack for their partners or asked to forward the electronic version to their partner. The purposively designed questionnaire collected demographic information (age, marital status, education level, private health insurance status, number of children, whether this was their first pregnancy and language spoken at home). Women were asked about prenatal screening and diagnostic testing in the current and/or previous pregnancies. Functional health literacy was assessed using a single item “How confident are you filling out medical forms by yourself”.9 Participants were asked to indicate whether they perceived prenatal testing to be a part of routine care or a choice, whether they had received information regarding prenatal testing (including the format and from whom), how easy information was to understand, whether the amount of information was appropriate and their preferred information format. Participants were asked whether they had actively sought supplementary information, where they looked and why. Data were analyzed using Statistical Program for the Social Science 20.0 (SPSS, Chicago, IL). Mean preference ratings for individual information delivery formats were calculated by averaging the preference score across all participants for each format. Responses to the open-ended questions were analyzed for themes by investigator AW and reported quantitatively.
This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
In total, 229 questionnaires were included in the analysis (153 women, 76 partners). The average age of female participants was 32.2 years (SD=4.3 years) and 34.6 years (SD=5.4 years) for partners. The majority of women and partners (80.3% and 85.5% respectively) had no children and for 116 women (75.8%) this was their first pregnancy. Most participants had completed a university degree (n=171, 74.6%), were married or in a de facto relationship (n=183, 79.9%), had private health insurance (n=150, 65.5%) and spoke English at home (n=187, 81.7%). Self-reported functional health literacy was high, with 135 women (88.2%) and 65 partners (91.5%) “extremely” or “quite a bit” confident filling out medical forms. Twenty-five women (16.3%) reported having had some form of prenatal testing in a previous pregnancy and 139 (90.8%) in the current pregnancy. Prenatal testing was perceived as routine by 92 women (60.1%) and 40 partners (52.3%) and as a choice by 56 women (36.6%) and 32 partners (42.7%). Figure 1 shows the range of information sources and formats reported by participants. For women, GPs were the most common source of information (n=84, 54.9%), followed by obstetricians (n=46, 30.1%) and friends/family (n=30, 19.6%). GPs (n=17, 22.4%) were also the most common source of information for partners, followed by partner/spouse (n=12, 15.8%) and obstetricians (n=10, 13.2%). Face-to-face delivered (women: n=91, 59.5%, partners; n=22, 28.9%) and paper-based information (women: n=91, 59.5%, partners; n=22, 28.9%) were the most frequently reported formats. Only 14 women (9.2%) and 11 partners (14.5%) had received online information. The majority of participants found all formats either “very easy” or “quite easy” to understand (range from 87.5% for mobile app to 99% for face-to-face).
This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
[Insert Figure 1 about here] Ninety-nine women (81.1%) and 23 partners (71.9%) stated that they had received the “right amount” of information. For 22 women (18.0%) and nine partners (28.1%) the amount of information was “not enough”. Altogether, 98 women (64.1%) actively sought supplementary information, either online (n=85, 86.7%), in books or other paper-based sources (n=29, 29.6%), from a health professional (n=8, 8.1%) or friend/family member (n=7, 7.1%). Common reasons for seeking information were: a desire to be better informed (n=60, 61.2%), a perceived high risk (n=13, 13.2%) and insufficient information from the healthcare provider (n=7, 7.1%). Fifty-five women did not seek supplementary information, of whom 21 (38.1%) stated the information provided had been sufficient, seven (12.7%) trusted their health professional to inform them, six (10.9%) perceived themselves as low risk and four (7.3%) had experience from previous pregnancies. Thirty-two partners (42.1%) had actively sought supplementary information, either online (n=24, 75.0%), in books or other paper-based information (n=12, 37.5%), from a health professional (n=3, 9.4%) or from their partner (n=2, 6.2%). Most partners also desired a better understanding of prenatal testing (n=22, 68.8%). Of the 44 partners who did not seek supplementary information, 12 (27.2%) expected information would be provided by the pregnant woman, eight (18.1%) expected to be informed by a health professional and five (11.4%) were satisfied with the information provided. The overall rankings and mean preference ratings from participants’ ranking of the information delivery formats are presented in Table 1. Both women and partners ranked
This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
face-to-face delivery highest, followed by paper-based and then online. Audio format (tape or CD) was the least preferred delivery format for both women and partners. [Insert Table 1 about here] Overall, the findings of this study concur with previous studies in demonstrating that women prefer to receive information about prenatal testing face-to-face,3 while still rating paper-based information highly.4 This result was unsurprising, given face-to-face delivery provides the opportunity for personalized discussion and immediate clarification of concerns, yet also reassuring as, currently, participants’ preferences appear to be met in clinical practice. However, the capacity for continued provision of face-to-face services may be limited with increasing demand for non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) as it broadens in scope and lowers barriers to screening participation.10 Despite seemingly high satisfaction with information provided among participants, a large number nonetheless searched for more information. The internet was the most commonly mentioned source of supplementary information in this study, consistent with reports of increasing access of online health information.7 However, despite the convenience, users may be ill-equipped to appraise online information and self-sourced online health information is not always verified with a health professional.7 A key strength of this study is the inclusion of data on the information preferences of partners, whose needs are often overlooked.8 The finding that partners are informed about prenatal testing by the pregnant woman may be cause for concern, given evidence of suboptimal knowledge about prenatal testing among pregnant women.6 Another strength is the inclusion of the internet and mobile phone apps as information sources, although we did
This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
not observe an increased preference for receiving information online compared to previous data.3 This may reflect the importance women place on decisions regarding prenatal testing or the need for emotional support in the decision-making process.4 The overall participation rate cannot be calculated due to indirect recruitment of partners. Importantly, most participants had high education and health literacy, were proficient in English and were likely motivated, having presented to a hospital for prenatal care. These factors limit the generalizability of the results. Satisfaction with information provided may be lower among couples who have lower education and health literacy skills, or do not speak English as a first language. In summary, preferences for receiving information about prenatal testing were consistent between pregnant women and their partners in this study, with preferences for face-to-face information remaining unchanged over the past decade. As the use of NIPT increases, the ability to provide adequate face-to-face information may be limited. Thus, development of alternative delivery formats and research into the acceptability of different forms of information provision in prenatal testing will be necessary to provide adequate support in future. Acknowledgements We are grateful to the couples who participated in this study. We also acknowledge Dr Mariana de Souza, A/Professor Kristine Barlow-Stewart and Dr Jane Fleming for their contribution to the study.
This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Ethics Ethics approval was obtained from the Human Research and Ethics Committees of all participating sites in Melbourne, Victoria (HREC no. 12/24). References
1
Mujezinovic F, Alfirevic Z. Procedure-related complications of amniocentesis and chorionic
villous sampling: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol 2007; 110:687-94. 2
Brondino N, Colombini G, Morandotti N, et al. Psychological correlates of decision-making
during prenatal diagnosis: a prospective study. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol 2013; 34:68-74. 3
Jaques AM, Bell RJ, 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. 4
Durand MA, Stiel M, Boivin J, et al. Information and decision support needs of parents
considering amniocentesis: interviews with pregnant women and health professionals. Health Expect 2010; 13:125-38. 5
Dormandy E, Michie S, Hooper R, et al. Low uptake of prenatal screening for Down
syndrome in minority ethnic groups and socially deprived groups: a reflection of women's attitudes or a failure to facilitate informed choices? Int J Epidemiol 2005; 34:346-52. 6
Dahl K, Hvidman L, Jørgensen FS, et al. First-trimester Down syndrome screening: pregnant
women's knowledge. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2011; 38:145-51. 7
Bianco A, Zucco R, Nobile CGA, et al. Parents Seeking Health-Related Information on the
Internet: Cross-Sectional Study. Journal of Medical Internet Research 2013; 15:268-77. 8
St-Jacques S, Grenier S, Charland M, et al. Decisional needs assessment regarding Down
syndrome prenatal testing: a systematic review of the perceptions of women, their partners and health professionals. Prenatal Diagnosis 2008; 28:1183-203. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
9
Powers BJ, Trinh JV, Bosworth HB. Can this patient read and understand written health
information? JAMA 2010; 304:76-84. 10
van Schendel RV, Kleinveld JH, Dondorp WJ, et al. Attitudes of pregnant women and male
partners towards non-invasive prenatal testing and widening the scope of prenatal screening. Eur J Hum Genet 2014; [Epub ahead of print].
This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Figure 1: Percentages of women and partners reporting having received information in a range of (a) sources and (b) formats. *Multiple responses permitted.
This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Table 1: Format preferences for receiving information regarding prenatal testing among pregnant women and their partners.
Group
Information format
N
Rank
Women
Face-to-face Paper-based Online Mobile phone app Video/DVD Information session Tape/CD Face-to-face Paper-based Online Information session Mobile phone app Video/DVD Tape/CD
134 136 128 99 96 93 94 61 65 62 54 54 53 53
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Partners
Preference rating Mean SD 1.9 1.4 2.2 1.4 2.6 1.6 4.9 2.2 5.2 2.0 5.2 2.0 6.0 1.6 2.2 1.8 2.6 1.8 2.9 1.6 4.5 1.8 4.9 2.1 5.0 1.7 6.1 1.3
This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Prince of Wales Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia;
2
Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia; 3Murdoch Children’s
Research Institute, Royal Children’s Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; 4Department of Paediatrics, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia Corresponding author: Amanda Willis, Psychosocial Research Group, Prince of Wales Clinical School, Level 4 Lowy Cancer Research Centre C25, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052 Australia. Telephone: +61-406-138-684, email: [email protected] Funding statement: This study was supported by the Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales. Associate Professor Bettina Meiser is supported by a Career Development Award Level 2 from the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia (NHMRC). Doctor Sian Smith is supported by an Early Career Fellowship from the NHMRC. Professor Jane Halliday is supported by a Senior Research Fellowship from the NHMRC (1021252).
This article has been accepted for publication and undergone full peer review but has not been through the copyediting, typesetting, pagination and proofreading process which may lead to differences between this version and the Version of Record. Please cite this article as doi: 10.1002/pd.4493
This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Disclosures: None declared. Manuscript word count: 1 499 Table count: 1 Figure count: 1 What’s already known about this topic? •
Women prefer to receive information about prenatal testing options face-to-face from a health professional.
•
Increasing numbers of people are accessing health-related information online.
What does this study add? •
In spite of increased online access of health information, both women and partners still prefer to receive information about prenatal testing options face-to-face.
•
High rates of information seeking were observed among pregnant women and partners, despite seemingly high satisfaction with information provided.
This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Prenatal screening is now widely available to all women regardless of age. Given the potential benefits and limitations of prenatal screening with follow up diagnostic testing 1, 2 it is imperative that women make an informed choice. Although pregnant women feel primarily responsible for decisions about prenatal testing, with input from their partners, 3 studies still show a lack of consistency in information provided,4 inequality of access to information,5 unmet support and information needs and limited knowledge of prenatal testing technologies among pregnant women.6 Face-to-face delivery has traditionally been the preferred method of information delivery among prospective parents, with paper-based information also popular.3-5 However, options for information delivery are now much broader due to increased online access of healthrelated information and willingness of patients to access services, networking and support online.2, 7 Since the last study comparing preferences for receiving prenatal testing information was published close to a decade ago,3 and there is a shortage of studies addressing the information needs and preferences of the couple as a unit and partners specifically,8 an updated view is required. This study aims to provide an up-to-date assessment of prospective parents’ preferences for receiving information about prenatal testing and examine whether information needs are currently being met. Pregnant women and their partners were recruited from a tertiary level public hospital and a private hospital in Melbourne, Australia, between December 2012 and April 2013. Couples were approached when attending the hospital for either the glucose challenge test or childbirth education classes (women approached were 24-35 weeks gestation). Couples were eligible if they were 18 years or over and proficient in English. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Women and their partners were either given a hard-copy study pack (consent form, participant information sheet and questionnaire), or provided their email address to receive electronic copies. Women attending alone were given a study pack for their partners or asked to forward the electronic version to their partner. The purposively designed questionnaire collected demographic information (age, marital status, education level, private health insurance status, number of children, whether this was their first pregnancy and language spoken at home). Women were asked about prenatal screening and diagnostic testing in the current and/or previous pregnancies. Functional health literacy was assessed using a single item “How confident are you filling out medical forms by yourself”.9 Participants were asked to indicate whether they perceived prenatal testing to be a part of routine care or a choice, whether they had received information regarding prenatal testing (including the format and from whom), how easy information was to understand, whether the amount of information was appropriate and their preferred information format. Participants were asked whether they had actively sought supplementary information, where they looked and why. Data were analyzed using Statistical Program for the Social Science 20.0 (SPSS, Chicago, IL). Mean preference ratings for individual information delivery formats were calculated by averaging the preference score across all participants for each format. Responses to the open-ended questions were analyzed for themes by investigator AW and reported quantitatively.
This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
In total, 229 questionnaires were included in the analysis (153 women, 76 partners). The average age of female participants was 32.2 years (SD=4.3 years) and 34.6 years (SD=5.4 years) for partners. The majority of women and partners (80.3% and 85.5% respectively) had no children and for 116 women (75.8%) this was their first pregnancy. Most participants had completed a university degree (n=171, 74.6%), were married or in a de facto relationship (n=183, 79.9%), had private health insurance (n=150, 65.5%) and spoke English at home (n=187, 81.7%). Self-reported functional health literacy was high, with 135 women (88.2%) and 65 partners (91.5%) “extremely” or “quite a bit” confident filling out medical forms. Twenty-five women (16.3%) reported having had some form of prenatal testing in a previous pregnancy and 139 (90.8%) in the current pregnancy. Prenatal testing was perceived as routine by 92 women (60.1%) and 40 partners (52.3%) and as a choice by 56 women (36.6%) and 32 partners (42.7%). Figure 1 shows the range of information sources and formats reported by participants. For women, GPs were the most common source of information (n=84, 54.9%), followed by obstetricians (n=46, 30.1%) and friends/family (n=30, 19.6%). GPs (n=17, 22.4%) were also the most common source of information for partners, followed by partner/spouse (n=12, 15.8%) and obstetricians (n=10, 13.2%). Face-to-face delivered (women: n=91, 59.5%, partners; n=22, 28.9%) and paper-based information (women: n=91, 59.5%, partners; n=22, 28.9%) were the most frequently reported formats. Only 14 women (9.2%) and 11 partners (14.5%) had received online information. The majority of participants found all formats either “very easy” or “quite easy” to understand (range from 87.5% for mobile app to 99% for face-to-face).
This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
[Insert Figure 1 about here] Ninety-nine women (81.1%) and 23 partners (71.9%) stated that they had received the “right amount” of information. For 22 women (18.0%) and nine partners (28.1%) the amount of information was “not enough”. Altogether, 98 women (64.1%) actively sought supplementary information, either online (n=85, 86.7%), in books or other paper-based sources (n=29, 29.6%), from a health professional (n=8, 8.1%) or friend/family member (n=7, 7.1%). Common reasons for seeking information were: a desire to be better informed (n=60, 61.2%), a perceived high risk (n=13, 13.2%) and insufficient information from the healthcare provider (n=7, 7.1%). Fifty-five women did not seek supplementary information, of whom 21 (38.1%) stated the information provided had been sufficient, seven (12.7%) trusted their health professional to inform them, six (10.9%) perceived themselves as low risk and four (7.3%) had experience from previous pregnancies. Thirty-two partners (42.1%) had actively sought supplementary information, either online (n=24, 75.0%), in books or other paper-based information (n=12, 37.5%), from a health professional (n=3, 9.4%) or from their partner (n=2, 6.2%). Most partners also desired a better understanding of prenatal testing (n=22, 68.8%). Of the 44 partners who did not seek supplementary information, 12 (27.2%) expected information would be provided by the pregnant woman, eight (18.1%) expected to be informed by a health professional and five (11.4%) were satisfied with the information provided. The overall rankings and mean preference ratings from participants’ ranking of the information delivery formats are presented in Table 1. Both women and partners ranked
This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
face-to-face delivery highest, followed by paper-based and then online. Audio format (tape or CD) was the least preferred delivery format for both women and partners. [Insert Table 1 about here] Overall, the findings of this study concur with previous studies in demonstrating that women prefer to receive information about prenatal testing face-to-face,3 while still rating paper-based information highly.4 This result was unsurprising, given face-to-face delivery provides the opportunity for personalized discussion and immediate clarification of concerns, yet also reassuring as, currently, participants’ preferences appear to be met in clinical practice. However, the capacity for continued provision of face-to-face services may be limited with increasing demand for non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) as it broadens in scope and lowers barriers to screening participation.10 Despite seemingly high satisfaction with information provided among participants, a large number nonetheless searched for more information. The internet was the most commonly mentioned source of supplementary information in this study, consistent with reports of increasing access of online health information.7 However, despite the convenience, users may be ill-equipped to appraise online information and self-sourced online health information is not always verified with a health professional.7 A key strength of this study is the inclusion of data on the information preferences of partners, whose needs are often overlooked.8 The finding that partners are informed about prenatal testing by the pregnant woman may be cause for concern, given evidence of suboptimal knowledge about prenatal testing among pregnant women.6 Another strength is the inclusion of the internet and mobile phone apps as information sources, although we did
This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
not observe an increased preference for receiving information online compared to previous data.3 This may reflect the importance women place on decisions regarding prenatal testing or the need for emotional support in the decision-making process.4 The overall participation rate cannot be calculated due to indirect recruitment of partners. Importantly, most participants had high education and health literacy, were proficient in English and were likely motivated, having presented to a hospital for prenatal care. These factors limit the generalizability of the results. Satisfaction with information provided may be lower among couples who have lower education and health literacy skills, or do not speak English as a first language. In summary, preferences for receiving information about prenatal testing were consistent between pregnant women and their partners in this study, with preferences for face-to-face information remaining unchanged over the past decade. As the use of NIPT increases, the ability to provide adequate face-to-face information may be limited. Thus, development of alternative delivery formats and research into the acceptability of different forms of information provision in prenatal testing will be necessary to provide adequate support in future. Acknowledgements We are grateful to the couples who participated in this study. We also acknowledge Dr Mariana de Souza, A/Professor Kristine Barlow-Stewart and Dr Jane Fleming for their contribution to the study.
This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Ethics Ethics approval was obtained from the Human Research and Ethics Committees of all participating sites in Melbourne, Victoria (HREC no. 12/24). References
1
Mujezinovic F, Alfirevic Z. Procedure-related complications of amniocentesis and chorionic
villous sampling: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol 2007; 110:687-94. 2
Brondino N, Colombini G, Morandotti N, et al. Psychological correlates of decision-making
during prenatal diagnosis: a prospective study. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol 2013; 34:68-74. 3
Jaques AM, Bell RJ, 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. 4
Durand MA, Stiel M, Boivin J, et al. Information and decision support needs of parents
considering amniocentesis: interviews with pregnant women and health professionals. Health Expect 2010; 13:125-38. 5
Dormandy E, Michie S, Hooper R, et al. Low uptake of prenatal screening for Down
syndrome in minority ethnic groups and socially deprived groups: a reflection of women's attitudes or a failure to facilitate informed choices? Int J Epidemiol 2005; 34:346-52. 6
Dahl K, Hvidman L, Jørgensen FS, et al. First-trimester Down syndrome screening: pregnant
women's knowledge. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2011; 38:145-51. 7
Bianco A, Zucco R, Nobile CGA, et al. Parents Seeking Health-Related Information on the
Internet: Cross-Sectional Study. Journal of Medical Internet Research 2013; 15:268-77. 8
St-Jacques S, Grenier S, Charland M, et al. Decisional needs assessment regarding Down
syndrome prenatal testing: a systematic review of the perceptions of women, their partners and health professionals. Prenatal Diagnosis 2008; 28:1183-203. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
9
Powers BJ, Trinh JV, Bosworth HB. Can this patient read and understand written health
information? JAMA 2010; 304:76-84. 10
van Schendel RV, Kleinveld JH, Dondorp WJ, et al. Attitudes of pregnant women and male
partners towards non-invasive prenatal testing and widening the scope of prenatal screening. Eur J Hum Genet 2014; [Epub ahead of print].
This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Figure 1: Percentages of women and partners reporting having received information in a range of (a) sources and (b) formats. *Multiple responses permitted.
This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Table 1: Format preferences for receiving information regarding prenatal testing among pregnant women and their partners.
Group
Information format
N
Rank
Women
Face-to-face Paper-based Online Mobile phone app Video/DVD Information session Tape/CD Face-to-face Paper-based Online Information session Mobile phone app Video/DVD Tape/CD
134 136 128 99 96 93 94 61 65 62 54 54 53 53
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Partners
Preference rating Mean SD 1.9 1.4 2.2 1.4 2.6 1.6 4.9 2.2 5.2 2.0 5.2 2.0 6.0 1.6 2.2 1.8 2.6 1.8 2.9 1.6 4.5 1.8 4.9 2.1 5.0 1.7 6.1 1.3
This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
