The Feasibility and Impact of a Computer-Aided Genetics Education Module in an Obstetrics Clinic: A Randomized Controlled Trial

References

• Ravitsky V, Roy M-C, Haidar H, et al. The emergence and global spread of noninvasive prenatal testing. Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet. 2021;22(1):309–338. doi:10.1146/annurev-genom-083118-015053.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Birch PH. Interactive e-counselling for genetics pre-test decisions: where are we now? Clin Genet. 2015;87(3):209–217. doi:10.1111/cge.12430.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seavilleklein V. Challenging the rhetoric of choice in prenatal screening. Bioethics. 2009;23(1):68–77. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8519.2008.00674.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fonda Allen J, Stoll K, Bernhardt BA. Pre- and post-test genetic counseling for chromosomal and Mendelian disorders. Semin Perinatol. 2016;40(1):44–55. doi:10.1053/j.semperi.2015.11.007.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 88, December 2007. Invasive prenatal testing for aneuploidy. Obstet Gynecol. 2007;110(6):1459–1467. PMID: 18055749. doi:10.1097/01.AOG.0000291570.63450.44
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• ACOG Committee on Practice Bulletins. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 77: screening for fetal chromosomal abnormalities. Obstet Gynecol. 2007;109(1):217–227. PMID: 17197615. doi:10.1097/00006250-200701000-00054
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• FDA Warns of Risks Associated with Non-Invasive Prenatal Screening Tests. https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-warns-risks-associated-non-invasive-prenatal-screening-tests. Updated April 19, 2022. Accessed May 4, 2022.
   Google Scholar
• ACOG Statement on FDA Warning on Genetic Non-Invasive Prenatal Screening Tests. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. https://www.acog.org/news/news-releases/2022/04/statement-on-fda-warning-genetic-non-invasive-prenatal-screening-tests. Updated April 20, 2022. Accessed May 4, 2022.
   Google Scholar
• Smith SK, Sousa MS, Essink-Bot ML, Halliday J, Peate M, Fransen M. Socioeconomic differences in informed decisions about Down syndrome screening: a systematic review and research agenda. J Health Commun. 2016;21(8):868–907. doi:10.1080/10810730.2016.1177145.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bryant AS, Norton ME, Nakagawa S, et al. Variation in women’s understanding of prenatal testing. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;125(6):1306–1312. doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000000843.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elwyn G, O’Connor A, Stacey D, et al. Developing a quality criteria framework for patient decision aids: online international Delphi consensus process. BMJ. 2006;333(7565):417. doi:10.1136/bmj.38926.629329.AE.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elwyn G, O’Connor AM, Bennett C, et al. Assessing the quality of decision support technologies using the International Patient Decision Aid Standards instrument (IPDASi). PLoS One. 2009;4(3):e4705. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0004705.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joseph-Williams N, Newcombe R, Politi M, et al. Toward minimum standards for certifying patient decision aids: a modified Delphi Consensus Process. Med Decis Making. 2014;34(6):699–710. doi:10.1177/0272989x13501721.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Entwistle V. The potential contribution of decision aids to screening programmes. Health Expect. 2001;4(2):109–115. doi:10.1046/j.1369-6513.2001.00141.x.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Estabrooks C, Goel V, Thiel E, Pinfold P, Sawka C, Williams I. Decision aids: are they worth it? A systematic review. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2001;6(3):170–182. doi:10.1258/1355819011927431.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Molenaar S, Sprangers MA, Postma-Schuit FC, et al. Feasibility and effects of decision aids. Med Decis Making. 2000;20(1):112–127. doi:10.1177/0272989x0002000114.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yee LM, Wolf M, Mullen R, et al. A randomized trial of a prenatal genetic testing interactive computerized information aid. Prenat Diagn. 2014;34(6):552–557. doi:10.1002/pd.4347.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nagle C, Gunn J, Bell R, et al. Use of a decision aid for prenatal testing of fetal abnormalities to improve women’s informed decision making: a cluster randomised controlled trial [ISRCTN22532458]. Bjog. 2008;115(3):339–347. doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2007.01576.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuppermann M, Pena S, Bishop JT, et al. Effect of enhanced information, values clarification, and removal of financial barriers on use of prenatal genetic testing: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2014;312(12):1210–1217. doi:10.1001/jama.2014.11479.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuppermann M, Norton ME, Gates E, et al. Computerized prenatal genetic testing decision-assisting tool: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;113(1):53–63. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e31818e7ec4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Connor AM, Stacey D, Entwistle V, et al. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2003;2:Cd001431. doi:10.1002/14651858.Cd001431.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bekker HL, Hewison J, Thornton JG. Applying decision analysis to facilitate informed decision making about prenatal diagnosis for Down syndrome: a randomised controlled trial. Prenat Diagn. 2004;24(4):265–275. doi:10.1002/pd.851.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Björklund U, Marsk A, Levin C, Öhman SG. Audiovisual information affects informed choice and experience of information in antenatal Down syndrome screening–a randomized controlled trial. Patient Educ Couns. 2012;86(3):390–395. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2011.07.004.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stacey D, Légaré F, Lewis K, et al. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;4(4):Cd001431. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD001431.pub5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Molina F, Dehlendorf C, Gregorich SE, Kuppermann M. Women’s preferences for and experiences with prenatal genetic testing decision making: sociodemographic disparities in preference-concordant decision making. Patient Educ Couns. 2019;102(3):595–601. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2018.10.019.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ondersma SJ, Chase SK, Svikis DS, Schuster CR. Computer-based brief motivational intervention for perinatal drug use. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2005;28(4):305–312. doi:10.1016/j.jsat.2005.02.004.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ACOG Committee on Obstetrics. ACOG practice bulletin No. 78: hemoglobinopathies in pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol. 2007;109(1):229–237. PMID: 17197616. doi:10.1097/00006250-200701000-00055
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• ACOG Committee on Obstetrics. Practice bulletin No. 162: screening for fetal aneuploidy. Obstet Gynecol. 2020;136(4):e48–e69. doi:10.1097/AOG.0000000000004084.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ACOG Committee on Obstetrics. Practice bulletin No. 163: screening for fetal aneuploidy. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;127(5):e123–e137. doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000001406.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ACOG Committee on Obstetrics. Opinion No. 410: ethical issues in genetic testing. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;111(6):1495–1502. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e31817d252f.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• ACOG Committee on Obstetrics. Opinion No. 442: preconception and prenatal carrier screening for genetic diseases in individuals of Eastern European Jewish descent. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114(4):950. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181bd12f4.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• ACOG Committee on Obstetrics. Opinion No. 486: update on carrier screening for cystic fibrosis. Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Apr;117(4):1028–1031. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e31821922c2.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• ACOG Committee on Obstetrics. Opinion summary No. 640: cell-free DNA screening for fetal aneuploidy. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;126(3):691–692. doi:10.1097/01.AOG.0000471171.86798.ac.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ACOG Committee on Obstetrics. Opinion No. 691 summary: carrier screening for genetic conditions. Obstet Gynecol. 2017;129(3):597–599. doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000001948.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson KL, Czerwinski JL, Hoskovec JM, et al. NSGC practice guideline: prenatal screening and diagnostic testing options for chromosome aneuploidy. J Genet Couns. 2013;22(1):4–15. doi:10.1007/s10897-012-9545-3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowen DJ, Kreuter M, Spring B, et al. How we design feasibility studies. Am J Prev Med. 2009;36(5):452–457. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2009.02.002.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Who is eligible? Data Detroit: Detroit’s open data portal. https://detroitmi.gov/departments/housing-and-revitalization-department/affordable-housing/who-eligible#:~:text=low%2Dincome%20household%3A%20income%20of,AMI%20(%2418%2C840)%20or%20less. Accessed May 4, 2022.
   Google Scholar
• Browner CH, Preloran HM, Casado MC, Bass HN, Walker AP. Genetic counseling gone awry: miscommunication between prenatal genetic service providers and Mexican-origin clients. Soc Sci Med. 2003;56(9):1933–1946. doi:10.1016/s0277-9536(02)00214-9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lowe C, Beach MC, Roter DL. Individuation and implicit racial bias in genetic counseling communication. Patient Educ Couns. 2020 Apr;103(4):804–810. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2019.10.016.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooper LA, Roter DL, Carson KA, et al. The associations of clinicians’ implicit attitudes about race with medical visit communication and patient ratings of interpersonal care. Am J Public Health. 2012;102(5):979–987. doi:10.2105/ajph.2011.300558.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schaa KL, Roter DL, Biesecker BB, Cooper LA, Erby LH. Genetic counselors’ implicit racial attitudes and their relationship to communication. Health Psychol. 2015;34(2):111–1119. doi:10.1037/hea0000155.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Commission for Health Education Credentialing. https://www.nchec.org/responsibilities-and-competencies. Published 2020. Accessed February 2, 2023.
   Google Scholar