The Perspectives and Experiences of Prospective Parents Declining Diagnostic Prenatal Genome Sequencing in Continuing Pregnancies With Fetal Structural Anomalies

The reasons individuals declined pGS included medical and emotional risks of testing and an understanding of potential results and their utility. To address these concerns, pretest genetic counseling should include the probability of diagnostic results, impact of prenatal/perinatal management, consideration of uncertain results, privacy concerns, and benefits and limitations of postnatal testing. Non-invasive prenatal sequencing, currently under investigation in research settings, may be an alternative future option, but will not address all concerns. Given that our cohort was small and homogenous, lacked cost burden, excluded terminated pregnancies, and included no postnatal genetic diagnoses, further research is needed to confirm that these findings are generalizable.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Prenatal Diagnosis
Published
2025-12-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/pd.70034
Primary Topic
Prenatal Screening and Diagnostics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Perspectives and Experiences of Prospective Parents Declining Diagnostic Prenatal Genome Sequencing in Continuing Pregnancies With Fetal Structural Anomalies

Aaron B. Caughey, Daniel T. Swarr, Grant Bonesteele, Stephanie Galloway et al.
Prenatal Diagnosis
Prenatal Screening and Diagnostics
article

The Perspectives and Experiences of Prospective Parents Declining Diagnostic Prenatal Genome Sequencing in Continuing Pregnancies With Fetal Structural Anomalies

Aaron B. Caughey, Daniel T. Swarr, Grant Bonesteele, Stephanie Galloway, Wendy K. Chung, Leandra Tolusso, Neeta L. Vora, Samantha Stover, Ronald J. Wapner, Lauren E. Westerfield, Jessica de Voest, Jessica L. Giordano, Allison Rosenbaum, Anthony Johnson, Rebecca G. Clifton, Kelly L. Gilmore, Ignatia B. Van den Veyver, Lisa Weingarten, A. Theresa Wittman, Nancy Leslie, B K Wong
article en

Abstract

The reasons individuals declined pGS included medical and emotional risks of testing and an understanding of potential results and their utility. To address these concerns, pretest genetic counseling should include the probability of diagnostic results, impact of prenatal/perinatal management, consideration of uncertain results, privacy concerns, and benefits and limitations of postnatal testing. Non-invasive prenatal sequencing, currently under investigation in research settings, may be an alternative future option, but will not address all concerns. Given that our cohort was small and homogenous, lacked cost burden, excluded terminated pregnancies, and included no postnatal genetic diagnoses, further research is needed to confirm that these findings are generalizable.

Prenatal Diagnosis
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US), Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center (US), Boston Children's Hospital (US), Harvard University (US), Oregon Health & Science University (US), Baylor College of Medicine (US), George Washington University (US), Columbia University Irving Medical Center (US), Texas Children's Hospital (US), The University of Texas Health Science Center (US), University of Cincinnati (US), Columbia University (US), Vanderbilt University Medical Center (US)
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
Openalex Percentile: Top 51%
Prenatal Screening and Diagnostics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.