4.4 Article

Women's and healthcare professionals' preferences for prenatal testing: a discrete choice experiment

Journal

PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS
Volume 35, Issue 6, Pages 549-557

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1002/pd.4571

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Foundation for Prenatal Screening in the Nijmegen Region

Ask authors/readers for more resources

ObjectiveThis study evaluates pregnant women's and healthcare professionals' preferences regarding specific prenatal screening and diagnostic test characteristics. MethodA discrete choice experiment was developed to assess preferences for prenatal tests that differed in seven attributes: minimal gestational age, time to test results, level of information, detection rate, false positive rate, miscarriage risk and costs. ResultsThe questionnaire was completed by 596 (70.2%) pregnant women and 297 (51.7%) healthcare professionals, of whom 507 (85.1%) and 283 (95.3%), respectively, were included in further analyses as their choice behavior indicated prenatal testing was an option to them. Comparison of results showed differences in relative importance attached to attributes, further reflected by differences in willingness to trade between attributes. Pregnant women are willing to accept a less accurate test to obtain more information on fetal chromosomal status or to exclude the risk of procedure-related miscarriage. Healthcare professionals consider level of information and miscarriage risk to be most important as well but put more emphasis on timing and accuracy. ConclusionPregnant women and healthcare professionals differ significantly in their preferences regarding prenatal test characteristics. Healthcare professionals should take these differences into consideration when counseling pregnant women on prenatal testing. (c) 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available