↓ Skip to main content

How can we improve amniocentesis decision-making?

Overview of attention for article published in Israel Journal of Health Policy Research, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 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
How can we improve amniocentesis decision-making?
Published in
Israel Journal of Health Policy Research, February 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13584-016-0060-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lisa Soleymani Lehmann

Abstract

The decision to have an amniocentesis entails a trade-off between a risk of procedure associated miscarriage and the benefit of obtaining diagnostic information to identify Down syndrome or other chromosomal aneuploidy. Ideally, this trade-off is informed by first and second trimester pre-natal screening tests, such that women with low risk screening test results are not encouraged to have an amniocentesis. In a recent IJHPR article, Grinshpun-Cohen et al. surveyed 42 Israeli women without a medical indication for amniocentesis other than age. They found that one third of women who had a noninvasive serum screening test prior to amniocentesis did not even wait for the test results before electing to have the invasive procedure and 10 % of women did not have any serum screening test prior to amniocentesis. There may be multiple reasons why women of advanced maternal age are not integrating screening risk information into their decision-making about amniocentesis. However, our understanding of those reasons is limited, as we don't have information on the content of conversations between health care providers and women who are considering amniocentesis. We don't know if health care providers counseled women on how screening risk information can inform their decision about whether or not to purse a diagnostic amniocentesis. Even if women with screening tests results suggestive of a low risk of Down syndrome were counseled not to pursue an amniocentesis, some women may have a preference for diagnostic information about a fetus's Down syndrome status. Health care providers should, however, be encouraged to engage women in a process of shared decision making to ensure that women are informed and making deliberative decisions that meet their goals of care. Offering women a relatively new, cell-free fetal DNA test may provide reassurance that negates the impulse to have an amniocentesis. Public funding for amniocentesis for all women of advanced maternal age should continue as the decision to purse an amniocentesis is best determined by women who have to live with the consequences of their choice.

Twitter Demographics

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

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 15%
Other 3 15%
Researcher 3 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 10%
Student > Bachelor 2 10%
Other 4 20%
Unknown 3 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 15%
Social Sciences 3 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 10%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 5%
Other 3 15%
Unknown 2 10%

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 05 February 2016.
All research outputs
#6,111,360
of 7,103,144 outputs
Outputs from Israel Journal of Health Policy Research
#143
of 172 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#264,101
of 319,265 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Israel Journal of Health Policy Research
#9
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 7,103,144 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 172 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. 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 319,265 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 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.