Our children are not a diagnosis: The experience of parents who continue their pregnancy after a prenatal diagnosis of trisomy 13 or 18
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Trisomy 13 and trisomy 18 (T13-18) are associated with high rates of perinatal death and with severe disability among survivors. Prenatal diagnosis (PND) may lead many women to terminate their pregnancy but some women choose to continue their pregnancy. We sent 503 invitations to answer a questionnaire to parents who belong to T13 and 18 internet support groups. Using mixed methods, we asked parents about their prenatal experience, their hopes, the life of their affected child, and their family experience. 332 parents answered questions about 272 children; 128 experienced PND. These parents, despite feeling pressure to terminate (61%) and being told that their baby would likely die before birth (94%), chose to continue the pregnancy. Their reasons included: moral beliefs (68%), child-centered reasons (64%), religious beliefs (48%), parent-centered reasons (28%), and practical reasons (6%). At the time of the diagnosis, most of these parents (80%) hoped to meet their child alive. By the time of birth, 25% chose a plan of full interventions. A choice of interventions at birth was associated with fewer major anomalies (P < 0.05). Parents describe "Special" healthcare providers as those who gave balanced and personalized information, respected their choice, and provided support. Parents make decisions to continue a pregnancy and choose a plan of care for their child according to their beliefs and their child's specific medical condition, respectively. Insights from parents' perspective can better enable healthcare providers to counsel and support families.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".