• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

基于人群的DNA筛查的教育与知情同意:早期检查新生儿筛查试点研究的混合方法评估

Education and Consent for Population-Based DNA Screening: A Mixed-Methods Evaluation of the Early Check Newborn Screening Pilot Study.

作者信息

Peay Holly L, Gwaltney Angela You, Moultrie Rebecca, Cope Heidi, Boyea Beth Lincoln-, Porter Katherine Ackerman, Duparc Martin, Alexander Amir A, Biesecker Barbara B, Isiaq Aminah, Check Jennifer, Gehtland Lisa, Bailey Donald B, King Nancy M P

机构信息

Genomics, Bioinformatics, and Translational Research Center, RTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC, Unites States.

Department of Biostatistics and Data Science, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston Salem, NC, United States.

出版信息

Front Genet. 2022 May 12;13:891592. doi: 10.3389/fgene.2022.891592. eCollection 2022.

DOI:10.3389/fgene.2022.891592
PMID:35646095
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9133477/
Abstract

A challenge in implementing population-based DNA screening is providing sufficient information, that is, understandable and acceptable, and that supports informed decision making. Early Check is an expanded newborn screening study offered to mothers/guardians whose infants have standard newborn screening in North Carolina. We developed electronic education and consent to meet the objectives of feasibility, acceptability, trustworthiness, and supporting informed decisions. We used two methods to evaluate Early Check among mothers of participating infants who received normal results: an online survey and interviews conducted via telephone. Survey and interview domains included motivations for enrollment, acceptability of materials and processes, attitudes toward screening, knowledge recall, and trust. Quantitative analyses included descriptive statistics and assessment of factors associated with knowledge recall and trust. Qualitative data were coded, and an inductive approach was used to identify themes across interviews. Survey respondents ( = 1,823) rated the following as the most important reasons for enrolling their infants: finding out if the baby has the conditions screened (43.0%), and that no additional blood samples were required (20.1%). Interview respondents ( = 24) reported the value of early knowledge, early intervention, and ease of participation as motivators. Survey respondents rated the study information as having high utility for decision making (mean 4.7 to 4.8 out of 5) and 98.2% agreed that they had sufficient information. Knowledge recall was relatively high (71.8-92.5% correct), as was trust in Early Check information (96.2% strongly agree/agree). Attitudes about Early Check screening were positive (mean 0.1 to 0.6 on a scale of 0-4, with lower scores indicating more positive attitudes) and participants did not regret participation (e.g., 98.6% strongly agreed/agreed Early Check was the right decision). Interview respondents further reported positive attitudes about Early Check materials and processes. Early Check provides a model for education and consent in large-scale DNA screening. We found evidence of high acceptability, trustworthiness and knowledge recall, and positive attitudes among respondents. Population-targeted programs need to uphold practices that result in accessible information for those from diverse backgrounds. Additional research on those who do not select screening, although ethically and practically challenging, is important to inform population-based DNA screening practices.

摘要

实施基于人群的DNA筛查面临的一项挑战是提供足够的信息,即易于理解且可接受的信息,并支持明智的决策。早期检查是一项针对在北卡罗来纳州接受标准新生儿筛查的婴儿的母亲/监护人开展的扩展新生儿筛查研究。我们开发了电子教育和知情同意程序,以实现可行性、可接受性、可信度以及支持明智决策的目标。我们采用两种方法对参与研究且婴儿检查结果正常的母亲进行早期检查评估:在线调查和电话访谈。调查和访谈的领域包括参与动机、材料和流程的可接受性、对筛查的态度、知识记忆以及信任度。定量分析包括描述性统计以及对与知识记忆和信任度相关因素的评估。对定性数据进行编码,并采用归纳法确定访谈中的主题。调查受访者(n = 1823)将以下内容列为让婴儿参与研究的最重要原因:了解婴儿是否患有所筛查的疾病(43.0%),以及无需采集额外血样(20.1%)。访谈受访者(n = 24)表示,早期知晓、早期干预和参与的便利性是参与的动机。调查受访者认为研究信息对决策非常有用(平均分为4.7至4.8分,满分5分),98.2%的受访者同意他们已获得足够的信息。知识记忆相对较高(正确率为71.8 - 92.5%),对早期检查信息的信任度也较高(96.2%的受访者强烈同意/同意)。对早期检查筛查的态度是积极的(在0 - 4分的量表上平均分为0.1至0.6分,分数越低表明态度越积极),参与者不后悔参与(例如,98.6%的受访者强烈同意/同意早期检查是正确的决定)。访谈受访者进一步表示对早期检查的材料和流程持积极态度。早期检查为大规模DNA筛查中的教育和知情同意提供了一个模式。我们发现有证据表明受访者具有较高的可接受性、可信度和知识记忆,以及积极的态度。针对人群的项目需要坚持为不同背景的人提供可获取信息的做法。对那些未选择筛查的人群进行更多研究,尽管在伦理和实际操作上具有挑战性,但对于为基于人群的DNA筛查实践提供信息很重要。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4f36/9133477/ca62fc405ecb/fgene-13-891592-g006.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4f36/9133477/b528b648b43d/fgene-13-891592-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4f36/9133477/215130248280/fgene-13-891592-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4f36/9133477/9e4761f55290/fgene-13-891592-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4f36/9133477/e2e76a9c0082/fgene-13-891592-g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4f36/9133477/3da1ce97782f/fgene-13-891592-g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4f36/9133477/ca62fc405ecb/fgene-13-891592-g006.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4f36/9133477/b528b648b43d/fgene-13-891592-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4f36/9133477/215130248280/fgene-13-891592-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4f36/9133477/9e4761f55290/fgene-13-891592-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4f36/9133477/e2e76a9c0082/fgene-13-891592-g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4f36/9133477/3da1ce97782f/fgene-13-891592-g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4f36/9133477/ca62fc405ecb/fgene-13-891592-g006.jpg

相似文献

1
Education and Consent for Population-Based DNA Screening: A Mixed-Methods Evaluation of the Early Check Newborn Screening Pilot Study.基于人群的DNA筛查的教育与知情同意:早期检查新生儿筛查试点研究的混合方法评估
Front Genet. 2022 May 12;13:891592. doi: 10.3389/fgene.2022.891592. eCollection 2022.
2
Maternal knowledge and attitudes to universal newborn hearing screening: Reviewing an established program.母亲对新生儿普遍听力筛查的知识与态度:回顾一项既定计划。
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2018 Feb;105:146-153. doi: 10.1016/j.ijporl.2017.12.021. Epub 2017 Dec 23.
3
The effectiveness of health literacy interventions on the informed consent process of health care users: a systematic review protocol.健康素养干预措施对医疗保健使用者知情同意过程的有效性:一项系统评价方案
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015 Oct;13(10):82-94. doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2015-2304.
4
Use of a web-based portal to return normal individual research results in Early Check: Exploring user behaviors and attitudes.在早期检查中使用基于网络的门户返回正常个体研究结果:探索用户行为和态度。
Clin Genet. 2023 Jun;103(6):672-680. doi: 10.1111/cge.14325. Epub 2023 Mar 23.
5
"I think we've got too many tests!": Prenatal providers' reflections on ethical and clinical challenges in the practice integration of cell-free DNA screening.“我认为我们的检测太多了!”:产前医疗服务提供者对游离DNA筛查实践整合中伦理和临床挑战的反思
Ethics Med Public Health. 2016 Jul-Sep;2(3):334-342. doi: 10.1016/j.jemep.2016.07.006.
6
Provision of information about newborn screening antenatally: a sequential exploratory mixed-methods project.新生儿筛查的产前信息提供:一项序贯探索性混合方法项目。
Health Technol Assess. 2017 Oct;21(55):1-240. doi: 10.3310/hta21550.
7
8
Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of four different strategies for SARS-CoV-2 surveillance in the general population (CoV-Surv Study): a structured summary of a study protocol for a cluster-randomised, two-factorial controlled trial.在普通人群中进行 SARS-CoV-2 监测的四种不同策略的有效性和成本效益(CoV-Surv 研究):一项关于集群随机、双因素对照试验的研究方案的结构化总结。
Trials. 2021 Jan 8;22(1):39. doi: 10.1186/s13063-020-04982-z.
9
Perceptions, motivations and decision regret surrounding preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy.围绕胚胎植入前非整倍体遗传学检测的认知、动机和决策后悔。
Hum Reprod. 2020 Sep 1;35(9):2047-2057. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deaa154.
10
Cue-based versus scheduled feeding for preterm infants transitioning from tube to oral feeding: the Cubs mixed-methods feasibility study.基于线索的喂养与计划性喂养在早产儿经管饲向口服喂养过渡中的比较:Cubs 混合方法可行性研究。
Health Technol Assess. 2021 Dec;25(74):1-146. doi: 10.3310/hta25740.

引用本文的文献

1
Feasibility and clinical utility of expanded genomic newborn screening in the Early Check program.早期筛查项目中扩展基因组新生儿筛查的可行性及临床应用价值
Nat Med. 2025 Sep 5. doi: 10.1038/s41591-025-03945-8.
2
Genetic counselors' perspectives on genomic screening of apparently healthy newborns in the United States.美国遗传咨询师对健康新生儿进行基因组筛查的看法。
Genet Med Open. 2024 Aug 7;2:101885. doi: 10.1016/j.gimo.2024.101885. eCollection 2024.
3
Current Status of Newborn Bloodspot Screening Worldwide 2024: A Comprehensive Review of Recent Activities (2020-2023).

本文引用的文献

1
Informed Consent-We Can and Should Do Better.知情同意——我们能够且应该做得更好。
JAMA Netw Open. 2021 Apr 1;4(4):e2110848. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.10848.
2
Assessment of the research program's informed consent process.研究项目知情同意过程评估。
AJOB Empir Bioeth. 2021 Apr-Jun;12(2):72-83. doi: 10.1080/23294515.2020.1847214. Epub 2020 Dec 4.
3
Early Check: translational science at the intersection of public health and newborn screening.早期检查:公共卫生与新生儿筛查交叉领域的转化科学
《2024年全球新生儿血斑筛查现状:2020 - 2023年近期活动综合回顾》
Int J Neonatal Screen. 2024 May 23;10(2):38. doi: 10.3390/ijns10020038.
4
Genomic sequencing for newborn screening: current perspectives and challenges.新生儿筛查的基因组测序:当前观点与挑战
Croat Med J. 2024 Jun 13;65(3):261-267. doi: 10.3325/cmj.2024.65.261.
5
Genetic Screening-Emerging Issues.遗传筛查——新出现的问题。
Genes (Basel). 2024 May 3;15(5):581. doi: 10.3390/genes15050581.
6
Past as Prologue: Predicting Potential Psychosocial-Ethical Burdens of Positive Newborn Screens as Conditions Propagate.既往即序幕:随着疾病传播预测新生儿筛查阳性潜在的心理社会伦理负担
Int J Neonatal Screen. 2024 Feb 6;10(1):12. doi: 10.3390/ijns10010012.
7
When is the best time to screen and evaluate for treatable genetic disorders?: A lifespan perspective.何时是筛查和评估可治疗遗传疾病的最佳时机?:从寿命角度看。
Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet. 2023 Mar;193(1):44-55. doi: 10.1002/ajmg.c.32036. Epub 2023 Mar 6.
BMC Pediatr. 2019 Jul 17;19(1):238. doi: 10.1186/s12887-019-1606-4.
4
Building an Informed Consent Tool Starting with the Patient: The Patient-Centered Virtual Multimedia Interactive Informed Consent (VIC).从患者角度构建一份知情同意工具:以患者为中心的虚拟多媒体交互式知情同意书(VIC)。
AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2018 Apr 16;2017:374-383. eCollection 2017.
5
Perspectives on Electronic Informed Consent From Patients Underrepresented in Research in the United States: A Focus Group Study.美国研究中代表性不足患者对电子知情同意的看法:一项焦点小组研究
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2018 Oct;13(4):338-348. doi: 10.1177/1556264618773883. Epub 2018 May 23.
6
Online Education and e-Consent for GeneScreen, a Preventive Genomic Screening Study.基因筛查预防性基因组筛查研究的在线教育与电子知情同意书
Public Health Genomics. 2017;20(4):235-246. doi: 10.1159/000481359. Epub 2017 Oct 26.
7
A randomized study of multimedia informational aids for research on medical practices: Implications for informed consent.一项关于医学实践研究的多媒体信息辅助工具的随机研究:对知情同意的影响。
Clin Trials. 2017 Feb;14(1):94-102. doi: 10.1177/1740774516669352. Epub 2016 Sep 23.
8
Development and validation of a measure of informed choice for women undergoing non-invasive prenatal testing for aneuploidy.非整倍体无创产前检测女性知情选择量表的编制与验证
Eur J Hum Genet. 2016 Jun;24(6):809-16. doi: 10.1038/ejhg.2015.207. Epub 2015 Oct 28.
9
Interactive multimedia consent for biobanking: a randomized trial.生物样本库的交互式多媒体知情同意:一项随机试验。
Genet Med. 2016 Jan;18(1):57-64. doi: 10.1038/gim.2015.33. Epub 2015 Apr 2.
10
A randomized controlled trial of an electronic informed consent process.一项关于电子知情同意流程的随机对照试验。
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2014 Dec;9(5):1-7. doi: 10.1177/1556264614552627. Epub 2014 Oct 2.