Implementing genomics in the neonatal period: An assessment of parental decision making and anxiety
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As uptake of rapid genome sequencing (GS) in the neonatal period steadily increases, a clinical genetics service that is optimized to the needs of parents becomes increasingly important. We aimed to investigate factors that influence decision making about rapid GS by parents of infants admitted to neonatal intensive care units (NICU) and explore their experiences of decisional conflict and anxiety during this time. Parents of neonates suspected of having a genetic disorder and offered rapid GS in the NICU completed a questionnaire measuring experience with GS counseling, decisional conflict, and anxiety level. Our results demonstrate that despite a largely positive GS experience (70%; 21/30) among the survey respondents, 50.0% (14/28) experienced moderate to severe anxiety measured using the GAD-7 scale, and 34.6% (9/26) experienced decisional conflict measured using the SURE scale. We also showed that prematurity may be a modifier of anxiety in this group of parents and although not statistically significant, distance lived away from the hospital site could have practical significance. Open-ended responses to survey questions highlighted that feeling overwhelmed, the types of engagements parents had with healthcare providers, and the timing of information provision also influenced parental decision making in this setting. We suggest that the GAD-7 scale for generalized anxiety and SURE scale for decisional conflict could be incorporated by genetic counselors into routine care of parents of neonates who have been offered rapid GS to identify those who may need additional support (resources, information, or psychological). These tools may inform ways that communication between patients and providers can be improved and enhanced and clinical genetics services in the NICU can be optimized. We suggest that integrating genetic counselors into the NICU care team could increase access for this population and ensure delivery of optimized patient education and counseling.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".