Assessment of risk by pregnant women: implications for genetic counseling and education.

G. A. Chase, R. R. Faden, N. A. Holtzman, A. J. Chwalow, C. O. Leonard, C. Lopes, K. Quaid

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

33 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

One of the central elements of genetic counseling is the transmission of quantitative information concerning risks of defects in an unborn child from counselor to client. In order to investigate this subject, the authors studied the understanding of numeric and nonnumeric descriptions of genetic risk by 190 pregnant women. Specifically, 3 risk issues were explored: whether women were able to interpret numeric risks as %s whether shifting denominators affected risk assessment; and the comparative assessment of risk of birth defects in general, and the risk of a neural tube defect, (NTDS) in particular. Respondents were much less likely to assign the correct % equivalent to risk information when the denominator was 1,000 rather than 100. The ability to correctly identify % equivalents affected respondents' quantitative assessment of the frequency of neural tube defects. Shifting the denominator from 100 to 1,000 however, did not affect women's quantitative assessment of the rarity of birth defects. In general, the respondents preserved the relative risk of birth defects and neural tube defects in their choice of descriptive terms. The majority of women evaluated serious birth defects as occurring "often" or "occasionally" and NTDS as occurring "rarely" or "very rarely." author's modified

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)57-64
Number of pages8
JournalSocial biology
Volume33
Issue number1-2
StatePublished - Mar 1 1986

Fingerprint

counseling
Genetic Counseling
pregnant women
risk assessment
defect
Pregnant Women
education
neural tube defects
Education
Neural Tube Defects
comparative risk assessment
relative risk
woman
rarity
counselor
ability
Surveys and Questionnaires

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Demography
  • Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
  • Sociology and Political Science

Cite this

Chase, G. A., Faden, R. R., Holtzman, N. A., Chwalow, A. J., Leonard, C. O., Lopes, C., & Quaid, K. (1986). Assessment of risk by pregnant women: implications for genetic counseling and education. Social biology, 33(1-2), 57-64.

Assessment of risk by pregnant women : implications for genetic counseling and education. / Chase, G. A.; Faden, R. R.; Holtzman, N. A.; Chwalow, A. J.; Leonard, C. O.; Lopes, C.; Quaid, K.

In: Social biology, Vol. 33, No. 1-2, 01.03.1986, p. 57-64.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Chase, GA, Faden, RR, Holtzman, NA, Chwalow, AJ, Leonard, CO, Lopes, C & Quaid, K 1986, 'Assessment of risk by pregnant women: implications for genetic counseling and education.', Social biology, vol. 33, no. 1-2, pp. 57-64.
Chase GA, Faden RR, Holtzman NA, Chwalow AJ, Leonard CO, Lopes C et al. Assessment of risk by pregnant women: implications for genetic counseling and education. Social biology. 1986 Mar 1;33(1-2):57-64.
Chase, G. A. ; Faden, R. R. ; Holtzman, N. A. ; Chwalow, A. J. ; Leonard, C. O. ; Lopes, C. ; Quaid, K. / Assessment of risk by pregnant women : implications for genetic counseling and education. In: Social biology. 1986 ; Vol. 33, No. 1-2. pp. 57-64.
@article{596ee14988a045718c726df160c17b35,
title = "Assessment of risk by pregnant women: implications for genetic counseling and education.",
abstract = "One of the central elements of genetic counseling is the transmission of quantitative information concerning risks of defects in an unborn child from counselor to client. In order to investigate this subject, the authors studied the understanding of numeric and nonnumeric descriptions of genetic risk by 190 pregnant women. Specifically, 3 risk issues were explored: whether women were able to interpret numeric risks as {\%}s whether shifting denominators affected risk assessment; and the comparative assessment of risk of birth defects in general, and the risk of a neural tube defect, (NTDS) in particular. Respondents were much less likely to assign the correct {\%} equivalent to risk information when the denominator was 1,000 rather than 100. The ability to correctly identify {\%} equivalents affected respondents' quantitative assessment of the frequency of neural tube defects. Shifting the denominator from 100 to 1,000 however, did not affect women's quantitative assessment of the rarity of birth defects. In general, the respondents preserved the relative risk of birth defects and neural tube defects in their choice of descriptive terms. The majority of women evaluated serious birth defects as occurring {"}often{"} or {"}occasionally{"} and NTDS as occurring {"}rarely{"} or {"}very rarely.{"} author's modified",
author = "Chase, {G. A.} and Faden, {R. R.} and Holtzman, {N. A.} and Chwalow, {A. J.} and Leonard, {C. O.} and C. Lopes and K. Quaid",
year = "1986",
month = "3",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "33",
pages = "57--64",
journal = "Biodemography and Social Biology",
issn = "1948-5565",
publisher = "Taylor and Francis Ltd.",
number = "1-2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Assessment of risk by pregnant women

T2 - implications for genetic counseling and education.

AU - Chase, G. A.

AU - Faden, R. R.

AU - Holtzman, N. A.

AU - Chwalow, A. J.

AU - Leonard, C. O.

AU - Lopes, C.

AU - Quaid, K.

PY - 1986/3/1

Y1 - 1986/3/1

N2 - One of the central elements of genetic counseling is the transmission of quantitative information concerning risks of defects in an unborn child from counselor to client. In order to investigate this subject, the authors studied the understanding of numeric and nonnumeric descriptions of genetic risk by 190 pregnant women. Specifically, 3 risk issues were explored: whether women were able to interpret numeric risks as %s whether shifting denominators affected risk assessment; and the comparative assessment of risk of birth defects in general, and the risk of a neural tube defect, (NTDS) in particular. Respondents were much less likely to assign the correct % equivalent to risk information when the denominator was 1,000 rather than 100. The ability to correctly identify % equivalents affected respondents' quantitative assessment of the frequency of neural tube defects. Shifting the denominator from 100 to 1,000 however, did not affect women's quantitative assessment of the rarity of birth defects. In general, the respondents preserved the relative risk of birth defects and neural tube defects in their choice of descriptive terms. The majority of women evaluated serious birth defects as occurring "often" or "occasionally" and NTDS as occurring "rarely" or "very rarely." author's modified

AB - One of the central elements of genetic counseling is the transmission of quantitative information concerning risks of defects in an unborn child from counselor to client. In order to investigate this subject, the authors studied the understanding of numeric and nonnumeric descriptions of genetic risk by 190 pregnant women. Specifically, 3 risk issues were explored: whether women were able to interpret numeric risks as %s whether shifting denominators affected risk assessment; and the comparative assessment of risk of birth defects in general, and the risk of a neural tube defect, (NTDS) in particular. Respondents were much less likely to assign the correct % equivalent to risk information when the denominator was 1,000 rather than 100. The ability to correctly identify % equivalents affected respondents' quantitative assessment of the frequency of neural tube defects. Shifting the denominator from 100 to 1,000 however, did not affect women's quantitative assessment of the rarity of birth defects. In general, the respondents preserved the relative risk of birth defects and neural tube defects in their choice of descriptive terms. The majority of women evaluated serious birth defects as occurring "often" or "occasionally" and NTDS as occurring "rarely" or "very rarely." author's modified

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0022680784&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0022680784&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 3775442

AN - SCOPUS:0022680784

VL - 33

SP - 57

EP - 64

JO - Biodemography and Social Biology

JF - Biodemography and Social Biology

SN - 1948-5565

IS - 1-2

ER -