Are we Prepared? Genetic Counseling for Stillbirth in the Sequencing Era

{"Stillbirth":[0],"affects":[1],"approximately":[2],"1":[3,111],"in":[4,8,69,87,102,123,290],"175":[5],"pregnancies":[6],"annually":[7],"the":[9,13,26,40,103,181,219,273],"United":[10,104],"States.":[11],"Although":[12,212],"American":[14],"College":[15],"of":[16,25,39,43,113,166,221,228,247],"Obstetricians":[17],"and":[18,81,106,121,133,150,202,236,254,271,282],"Gynecologists":[19],"recommends":[20],"genetic":[21,59,76,126,186,269,285],"testing":[22,127,201,243],"as":[23,218,304],"part":[24],"stillbirth":[27,44,80,124],"evaluation,":[28],"families":[29],"often":[30,195],"face":[31],"barriers":[32,135,240,266],"to":[33,47,64,84,136,184,206,241,267,275,296,300],"obtaining":[34,203],"a":[35],"complete":[36],"evaluation.":[37],"Expansion":[38],"diagnostic":[41,56],"evaluation":[42,270],"is":[45,216],"expected":[46,63],"include":[48],"exome/genome":[49],"sequencing,":[50],"with":[51,108],"preliminary":[52],"studies":[53],"demonstrating":[54],"its":[55],"utility.":[57],"Consequently,":[58],"counselors":[60],"(GCs)":[61],"are":[62],"play":[65],"an":[66],"expanding":[67],"role":[68],"post-stillbirth":[70,302],"care.":[71,137],"This":[72],"study":[73],"explored":[74],"current":[75],"counseling":[77,175,286],"practices":[78],"for":[79,158,197,234],"GCs'":[82],"preparedness":[83],"support":[85],"patients":[86,176,199],"this":[88,179],"setting.":[89],"A":[90],"cross-sectional":[91],"survey":[92,117],"was":[93],"distributed":[94],"across":[95],"four":[96],"channels.":[97],"Eligible":[98],"participants":[99],"included":[100,244],"GCs":[101,207,229],"States":[105],"Canada":[107],"at":[109],"least":[110],"year":[112],"prenatal":[114],"experience.":[115],"The":[116],"assessed":[118],"GC":[119,288],"frequency":[120],"timing":[122],"counseling,":[125],"practices,":[128],"comfort":[129],"addressing":[130],"psychosocial":[131],"needs,":[132],"perceived":[134],"Responses":[138],"were":[139,146,156,162,194],"analyzed":[140],"using":[141,148],"descriptive":[142],"statistics.":[143],"Group":[144],"comparisons":[145],"performed":[147],"Chi-square":[149],"Fisher's":[151],"exact":[152],"tests.":[153],"Open-ended":[154],"responses":[155,161],"coded":[157],"themes.":[159],"Seventy-one":[160],"analyzed.":[163],"Approximately":[164],"half":[165],"respondents":[167],"(49.3%,":[168],"n":[169,191,209,251,260],"=":[170,192,210,226,252,261],"36)":[171],"reported":[172,230,245],"\\"never/very":[173],"rarely/rarely\\"":[174],"postpartum,":[177],"despite":[178],"being":[180],"optimal":[182],"time":[183],"offer":[185],"testing.":[187],"Delivering":[188],"providers":[189],"(46.5%,":[190],"33)":[193],"responsible":[196],"informing":[198],"about":[200],"consent,":[204],"compared":[205],"(11.3%,":[208],"8).":[211],"chromosomal":[213],"microarray":[214],"(CMA)":[215],"recommended":[217],"standard":[220],"care":[222,303],"(SOC),":[223],"12.7%":[224],"(n":[225],"9)":[227],"not":[231],"offering":[232],"CMA":[233],"anomalous":[235],"non-anomalous":[237],"stillbirths.":[238],"Perceived":[239],"SOC":[242,268],"lack":[246],"obstetrician":[248],"awareness":[249],"(91.5%,":[250],"65)":[253],"challenges":[255],"coordinating":[256],"specimen":[257],"collection":[258],"(90.1%,":[259],"64).":[262],"These":[263],"findings":[264],"highlight":[265],"underscore":[272],"need":[274],"strengthen":[276],"institutional":[277],"protocols,":[278],"enhance":[279],"provider":[280],"education,":[281],"develop":[283],"stillbirth-specific":[284],"guidelines.":[287],"involvement":[289],"these":[291],"efforts":[292],"will":[293],"be":[294],"essential":[295],"promoting":[297],"equitable":[298],"access":[299],"comprehensive":[301],"sequencing":[305],"becomes":[306],"integrated":[307],"into":[308],"practice.":[309]}

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Genetic Counseling
Published
2026-09-10
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/jgc4.70267
Primary Topic
BRCA gene mutations in cancer
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

Are we Prepared? Genetic Counseling for Stillbirth in the Sequencing Era

A Demers, Carina Bertolini, Priyanka Ahimaz, Jessica L. Giordano et al.
Journal of Genetic Counseling
BRCA gene mutations in cancer
article

Are we Prepared? Genetic Counseling for Stillbirth in the Sequencing Era

A Demers, Carina Bertolini, Priyanka Ahimaz, Jessica L. Giordano, Hector Marin, Olivia Schulist, Shai Bejarano, Michelle Florido
article en

Abstract

Stillbirth affects approximately 1 in 175 pregnancies annually in the United States. Although the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommends genetic testing as part of the stillbirth evaluation, families often face barriers to obtaining a complete evaluation. Expansion of the diagnostic evaluation of stillbirth is expected to include exome/genome sequencing, with preliminary studies demonstrating its diagnostic utility. Consequently, genetic counselors (GCs) are expected to play an expanding role in post-stillbirth care. This study explored current genetic counseling practices for stillbirth and GCs' preparedness to support patients in this setting. A cross-sectional survey was distributed across four channels. Eligible participants included GCs in the United States and Canada with at least 1 year of prenatal experience. The survey assessed GC frequency and timing in stillbirth counseling, genetic testing practices, comfort addressing psychosocial needs, and perceived barriers to care. Responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Group comparisons were performed using Chi-square and Fisher's exact tests. Open-ended responses were coded for themes. Seventy-one responses were analyzed. Approximately half of respondents (49.3%, n = 36) reported "never/very rarely/rarely" counseling patients postpartum, despite this being the optimal time to offer genetic testing. Delivering providers (46.5%, n = 33) were often responsible for informing patients about testing and obtaining consent, compared to GCs (11.3%, n = 8). Although chromosomal microarray (CMA) is recommended as the standard of care (SOC), 12.7% (n = 9) of GCs reported not offering CMA for anomalous and non-anomalous stillbirths. Perceived barriers to SOC testing included reported lack of obstetrician awareness (91.5%, n = 65) and challenges coordinating specimen collection (90.1%, n = 64). These findings highlight barriers to SOC genetic evaluation and underscore the need to strengthen institutional protocols, enhance provider education, and develop stillbirth-specific genetic counseling guidelines. GC involvement in these efforts will be essential to promoting equitable access to comprehensive post-stillbirth care as sequencing becomes integrated into practice.

Journal of Genetic CounselingVol. 35(5)
Columbia University Irving Medical Center (US), Columbia University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 11%
BRCA gene mutations in cancer
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.