Exploring measurement tools used to assess knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of pregnant women toward prenatal screening: A systematic review

Author:

Sacca Lea1ORCID,Zerrouki Yasmine1,Burgoa Sara1,Okwaraji Goodness1,Li Ashlee1,Arshad Shaima1,Gerges Maria1,Tevelev Stacey1,Kelly Sophie1,Knecht Michelle1ORCID,Kitsantas Panagiota1,Hunter Robert2,Scott Laurie2,Reynolds Alexis Piccoli2,Colon Gabriela2,Retrouvey Michele1

Affiliation:

1. Charles E. Schmidt College of Medicine, Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, FL, USA

2. Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Memorial HealthCare System, Hollywood, FL, USA

Abstract

There is a lack of standardized measurement tools globally to assess knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of expecting women toward prenatal screening. The purpose of this systematic review was to identify reasons women pursue or decline prenatal screening and compare the strengths and limitations of available measurement tools used to assess pregnant women’s perceptions, knowledge, and attitudes toward prenatal screening. This review followed the five-step York methodology by Arksey and O’Malley and incorporated recommendations from the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis checklist for the extraction, analysis, and presentation of results. The five steps consisted of: (1) identification of the research questions; (2) searching for relevant studies; (3) selection of studies relevant to the research questions; (4) data charting; and (5) collation, summarization, and reporting of results. Four online databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library) were selected after the librarian’s development of a detailed search strategy. The Rayyan platform was used between June 2023 and August 2023 to epitomize the articles produced from our search. A total of 68 eligible studies were included in the analysis. The top five major reasons for declining prenatal screening uptake included (1) being unsure of the risk of prenatal screening and harm to the baby or miscarriage ( n = 15), (2) not considering action such as termination of pregnancy for prenatal screening to be considered as necessary ( n = 14), (3) high cost ( n = 12), (4) lack of knowledge about testing procedures and being anxious about the test ( n = 10), and (5) being worried about probability of false negative or false positive results ( n = 6). Only 32 studies utilized scientifically validated instruments. Difficulties in capturing representative, adequately sized samples inclusive of diverse ethnicities and demographics were pervasive. Findings highlight the need for rigorous validation of research measurement methodologies to ensure the accuracy and applicability of resulting data regarding the assessment of prenatal screening perceptions, knowledge, and attitudes across diverse female populations. Registration: N/A.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Reference120 articles.

1. Development of prenatal screening—A historical overview

2. Prenatal testing: is it right for you? Mayo Clinic, https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/pregnancy-week-by-week/in-depth/prenatal-testing/art-20045177 (2022, cited 22 March 2024).

3. Prenatal Genetic Testing Options

4. Prenatal genetic testing 1: screening tests

5. Prenatally diagnosed Down syndrome: Mothers who continued their pregnancies evaluate their health care providers

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3