posted on 2017-08-31, 00:00authored byM.E. Bunnell, B.A. Tarini, M. Petros, A.J. Goldenberg, C. Wicklund
Abstract We aimed to better understand biobank participant
opinions of the benefits of newborn screening (NBS) for cer-
tain disorder types and how terminology used in NBS dis-
course might impact stakeholder opinion. We conducted a
between-subjects randomized survey of 5840 members of
the Northwestern University Biobank. The survey contained
12 scenarios, each describing a disorder and its treatment. For
each scenario, we varied the terminology used to describe
treatment options. One survey version used the term
intervention and the other treatment. The outcome measured
for each scenario was perceived benefit (for the infant) and
importance of testing (for participants). Comparisons were
made between participants and between scenarios. Ratings
of benefit and importance were not influenced by the use of
the term intervention versus treatment within scenarios.
Nuances existed in ratings of benefit to the infant and impor-
tance to participants amongst scenarios. Participants were
most likely to perceive benefit and importance in screening
for a disorder if treatment/intervention offered a high chance
of improved outcomes. While participants perceived benefit to
the infant and importance to themselves in screening for most
disorders, nuances in inter-scenario ratings suggest partici-
pants weighed availability and type of treatment/intervention
in consideration of the benefits of NBS.
History
Publisher Statement
Post print version of article may differ from published version. The final publication is available at springerlink.com; DOI: 10.1007/s12687-016-0279-z