“Both Sides of the Wheelchair”: The Views of Individuals with, and Parents of Individuals with Friedreich Ataxia Regarding Pre‐symptomatic Testing of Minors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Friedreich ataxia (FRDA) is an autosomal recessive neurodegenerative disorder characterized by variable age of onset, with no treatment proven to alter its natural history. Siblings of individuals with FRDA have a 25 % risk of developing the condition, raising issues around genetic testing of asymptomatic minors. There is a lack of professional consensus and limited empirical evidence to support provision or refusal of testing. This study aimed to ascertain the opinions of individuals with and parents of individuals with FRDA regarding pre-symptomatic testing of minors. A qualitative research approach using semi-structured interviews and thematic analysis was employed. Interviews with ten individuals with FRDA, and ten parents of individuals with FRDA were conducted, recorded, transcribed and analyzed. Four findings emerged. First, a number of arguments for and against testing minors were identified. Second, strong support existed from parents about the parental right to test their at-risk immature children, but individuals with FRDA were of mixed opinions. Third, participants felt it was not the clinician's role to make a final decision about whether testing occurs. Finally, a specific issue of concern regarding testing was what and when to tell at-risk children about the test result. The findings highlight a dilemma of how to manage the desires of some individuals and families affected by FRDA to access testing, when there is a lack of professional consensus due to differing opinions regarding autonomy, confidentiality and risk of harm. Research regarding the impact of testing and the views of at-risk individuals and clinicians is required so an appropriate framework for dealing with this contentious issue is developed.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".