↓ Skip to main content

Reproductive choices: a qualitative study of Dutch Moroccan and Turkish consanguineously married women’s perspectives on preconception carrier screening

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Women's Health, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Reproductive choices: a qualitative study of Dutch Moroccan and Turkish consanguineously married women’s perspectives on preconception carrier screening
Published in
BMC Women's Health, May 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12905-018-0574-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Petra Verdonk, Suzanne Metselaar, Oka Storms, Edien Bartels

Abstract

Cousin marriages, in the Netherlands most frequently between Turkish or Moroccan couples, are at higher risk of having offspring with recessive disorders. Often, these couples not perceive or accept this risk, and it is hardly considered a reason to refrain from family marriages. Preconception carrier screening (PCS) is offered to Jewish groups, and more recently in the Netherlands, to genetically isolated communities. In this study, Dutch Moroccan and Turkish women's perspectives on preconception carrier screening (PCS) and reproductive choices were explored. Individual interviews were held with Dutch Turkish and Moroccan consanguineously married women (n = 10) and seven group discussions with Turkish and Moroccan women (n = 86). Transcripts and notes were analyzed thematically. All women welcomed PCS particularly for premarital genetic screening; regardless of possible reproductive choices, they prefer information about their future child's health. Their perspectives on reproductive choices on the basis of screening results are diverse: refraining from having children is not an option, in vitro fertilization (IVF) combined with pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) was welcomed, while prenatal genetic diagnosis (PND), termination of pregnancy (TOP), in vitro fertilization with a donor egg cell, artificial insemination with donor sperm (AID), and adoption, were generally found to be unacceptable. Besides, not taking any special measures and preparing for the possibility of having a disabled child are also becoming optional now rather than being the default option. The women's preference for PCS for premarital screening as well as their outspokenness about not marrying or even divorcing when both partners appear to be carriers is striking. Raising awareness (of consanguinity, PCS and the choice for reproductive options), and providing information, screening and counseling sensitive to this target group and their preferences are essential in the provision of effective health care.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 83 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 13%
Student > Master 9 11%
Researcher 9 11%
Student > Bachelor 9 11%
Lecturer 5 6%
Other 10 12%
Unknown 30 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 17%
Social Sciences 10 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 5%
Psychology 3 4%
Other 9 11%
Unknown 28 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 18 April 2024.
All research outputs
#3,184,106
of 25,743,152 outputs
Outputs from BMC Women's Health
#408
of 2,342 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#61,276
of 345,139 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Women's Health
#15
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,743,152 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,342 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
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 345,139 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.