A Comparative Study Using Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in Prenatal Screening among pregnant women in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Context: The integration of Non-Invasive Prenatal Screening (NIPS) as a universal first-tier screening could provide an earlier screening and if needed, diagnostic result compared to standard screening. While the clinical performance of NIPS is well-documented, to our knowledge, no research has documented its impact on pregnant women’s health-related quality of life (HRQoL), thus hampering informed decision-making about prenatal options. Objective: We compared the impact of NIPS on HRQoL with that to standard care. Study Design and Analysis: In a prospective multicentric randomized 2:1 clinical trial, descriptive and multivariable analyses, mainly linear mixed models, were performed. Setting: Randomization considered age and recruitment site in Quebec and British-Columbia. Population Studied: Pregnant women (≥19 years) undergoing foetal chromosomal anomaly screening (T13, T18, T21). Intervention/Instrument: First-tier NIPS compared to standard care. Outcome Measures: HRQoL was assessed using the PROMIS-29 v2.1 at 10, 16, and 22 weeks of gestation. Results: A total of 7815 pregnant women have been recruited, with mean age of 32 years (Standard Deviation=4) and 64.7% of European origin in both groups. At 10, 16, and 22 weeks of gestation, the PROMIS-29 T-Scores of physical function, anxiety, depression, fatigue, sleep disturbance, ability to participate in social roles, and pain were 47.2 to 53.0 (± 6 to 8) in both arms and the majority falls within the normal limits category of the T-score across all PROMIS-29 domains. The mean differences between first-tier NIPS group and standard care group were -0.27 (95% CI -0.87;0.33, P=0.2) for physical function, 0.21 (95% CI -0.55;0.98, P=0.35) for anxiety,0.28 (95% CI -0.41;0.96, P=0.28) for depression,0.55 (95% CI -0.19;1.30, P=0.08) for fatigue, 0.15 (95% CI -0.35;0.95, P=0.18) for sleep disturbance, -0.50 (95% CI -1.25;0.22, P=0.09) for ability to participate in social roles, and 0.12 (95% CI -0.50;0.74 P=0.48) for pain. Conclusions: Trajectories of physical function, anxiety, depression, fatigue, sleep disturbance, ability to participate in social roles, and pain interference T-Scores were similar between groups. No significant differences were detected between the two groups. Our findings offer initial evidence that choosing first-tier NIPS for prenatal screening maintains HRQOL through 22 weeks of gestation, similar to standard care. This evidence will inform future decision aids about prenatal screening.
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 | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".