| Title |
Prenatal Testing for Adult‐Onset Conditions: the Position of the National Society of Genetic Counselors
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Genetic Counseling, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10897-016-9992-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Laura Hercher, Wendy R. Uhlmann, Erin P. Hoffman, Shanna Gustafson, Kelly M. Chen, the Public Policy Committee of NSGC |
| Abstract |
Advances in genetic testing and the availability of such testing in pregnancy allows prospective parents to test their future child for adult-onset conditions. This ability raises several complex ethical issues. Prospective parents have reproductive rights to obtain information about their fetus. This information may or may not alter pregnancy management. These rights can be in conflict with the rights of the future individual, who will be denied the right to elect or decline testing. This paper highlights the complexity of these issues, details discussions that went into the National Society of Genetic Counselors (NSGC) Public Policy Task Force's development of the Prenatal testing for Adult-Onset Conditions position statement adopted in November 2014, and cites relevant literature on this topic through December 2015. Issues addressed include parental rights and autonomy, rights of the future child, the right not to know, possible adverse effects on childhood and the need for genetic counseling. This paper will serve as a reference to genetic counselors and healthcare professionals when faced with this situation in clinical practice. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 65 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 19 | 29% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 11% |
| Researcher | 6 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 7 | 11% |
| Unknown | 14 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 14 | 22% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 14% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 12% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 6% |
| Philosophy | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 11 | 17% |
| Unknown | 17 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 July 2016.
All research outputs
#20,337,210
of 22,882,389 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Genetic Counseling
#1,016
of 1,145 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#304,957
of 351,889 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Genetic Counseling
#27
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,882,389 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,145 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 351,889 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.