Multidimensional Measure Of Informed Choice Research Articles

Informed choice and routinization of the second-trimester anomaly scan: a national cohort study in the Netherlands

BackgroundSince 2007 all pregnant women in the Netherlands are offered the second-trimester anomaly scan (SAS) in a nationwide prenatal screening program. This study aims to assess the level of informed choice of women opting for the SAS and to evaluate the presence of routinization 16 years after its implementation. It further explores decisional conflict and women’s decision making.MethodsThis prospective national survey study consisted of an online questionnaire which was completed after prenatal counseling and before undergoing the SAS. Informed choice was measured by the adapted multidimensional measure of informed choice (MMIC) and was defined in case women were classified as value-consistent, if their decision for the SAS was deliberated and made with sufficient knowledge.ResultsA total of 894/1167 (76.6%) women completed the questionnaire. Overall, 54.8% made an informed choice, 89.6% had good knowledge, 59.8% had deliberated their choice and 92.7% held a positive attitude towards the SAS. Women with low educational attainment (p=0.004) or respondents of non-Western descent (p=0.038) were less likely to make an informed choice. Decisional conflict was low, with a significantly lower decisional conflict score in women that made an informed choice (p<0.001). Most respondents (97.9%) did not perceive pressure to undergo the SAS.ConclusionsOur study showed a relatively low rate of informed choice for the SAS, due to absence of deliberation. Therefore, some routinization seem to be present in the Netherlands. However, most women had sufficient knowledge, did not perceive pressure and experienced low decisional conflict.

What knowledge is required for an informed choice related to non-invasive prenatal screening?

Non-invasive prenatal screening (NIPS) using cell-free DNA is a screening test for fetal aneuploidy offered by a variety of prenatal healthcare providers. Guidelines for genetic screening consistently recommend that providers facilitate informed choices, which have been associated with better psychological and clinical outcomes than uninformed choices. The multidimensional measure of informed choice (MMIC) is a widely used and theory-based measure that combines knowledge, values, and behavior to classify decisions as either informed or uniformed. We implemented a previously validated version of the MMIC for women offered NIPS to describe the choices made by women receiving prenatal care at the Vanderbilt University Medical Center. The survey included the Ottawa Decisional Conflict scale, an outcome measure used for validation of choice categorization. We found that most women (87%) made an informed choice about NIPS. Of the women categorized as uninformed, 67% had insufficient knowledge, and 33% had an attitude discordant with their decision. The vast majority of respondents (92.5%) underwent NIPS and had a positive attitude toward screening (94.3%). Ethnicity (p=0.04) and education (p=0.01) were found to be significantly associated with informed choice. Decisional conflict was extremely low among all participants, with only 5.6% of all participants demonstrating any form of decisional conflict, and all being categorized as having made an informed choice. This study suggests that pre-test counseling by a genetic counselor results in high rates of informed choice and low-decisional conflict amongst women offered NIPS by genetic counselors, though more research is required to determine if rates of informed choice remain high when NIPS is offered by other prenatal providers.

Routinization of prenatal screening with thenon-invasive prenatal test: pregnant women's perspectives.

Due to the favorable test characteristics of the non-invasive prenatal test (NIPT) in the screening of fetal aneuploidy, there has been a strong and growing demand for implementation. In the Netherlands, NIPT is offered within a governmentally supported screening program as a first-tier screening test for all pregnant women (TRIDENT-2 study). However, concerns have been raised that the test’s favorable characteristics might lead to uncritical use, also referred to as routinization. This study addresses women’s perspectives on prenatal screening with NIPT by evaluating three aspects related to routinization: informed choice, freedom to choose and (personal and societal) perspectives on Down syndrome. Nationwide, a questionnaire was completed by 751 pregnant women after receiving counseling for prenatal screening. Of the respondents, the majority (75.5%) made an informed choice for prenatal screening as measured by the multidimensional measure of informed choice (MMIC). Education level and religious affiliation were significant predictors of informed choice. The main reason to accept screening was “seeking reassurance” (25.5%), and the main reason to decline was “every child is welcome” (30.6%). The majority of respondents (87.7%) did not perceive societal pressure to test. Differences between test-acceptors and test-decliners in personal and societal perspectives on Down syndrome were found. Our study revealed high rates of informed decision-making and perceived freedom to choose regarding fetal aneuploidy screening, suggesting that there is little reason for concern about routinization of NIPT based on the perspectives of Dutch pregnant women. Our findings highlight the importance of responsible implementation of NIPT within a national screening program.

An RCT of a decision aid to support informed choices about taking aspirin to prevent colorectal cancer and other chronic diseases: a study protocol for the SITA (Should I Take Aspirin?) trial

BackgroundAustralian guidelines recommend that all people aged 50–70 years old actively consider taking daily low-dose aspirin (100–300 mg per day) for 2.5 to 5 years to reduce their risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). Despite the change of national CRC prevention guidelines, there has been no active implementation of the guidelines into clinical practice.We aim to test the efficacy of a health consultation and decision aid, using a novel expected frequency tree (EFT) to present the benefits and harms of low dose aspirin prior to a general practice consultation with patients aged 50–70 years, on informed decision-making and uptake of aspirin.MethodsApproximately five to seven general practices in Victoria, Australia, will be recruited to participate. Patients 50–70 years old, attending an appointment with their general practitioner (GP) for any reason, will be invited to participate in the trial. Two hundred fifty-eight eligible participants will be randomly allocated 1:1 to intervention or active control arms using a computer-generated allocation sequence stratified by general practice, sex, and mode of trial delivery (face-to-face or teletrial).There are two co-primary outcomes: informed decision-making at 1-month post randomisation, measured by the Multi-dimensional Measure of Informed Choice (MMIC), and self-reported daily use of aspirin at 6 months. Secondary outcomes include decisional conflict at 1-month and other behavioural changes to reduce CRC risk at both time points.DiscussionThis trial will test the efficacy of novel methods for implementing national guidelines to support informed decision-making about taking aspirin in 50–70-year-olds to reduce the risk of CRC and other chronic diseases.Trial registrationThe Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) ACTRN12620001003965. Registered on 10 October 2020.

Development and validation of a measure of informed choice for women undergoing non-invasive prenatal testing for aneuploidy.

Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) using cell-free DNA for aneuploidy is a highly accurate screening test; however, concerns exist around the potential for routinisation of testing. The multidimensional measure of informed choice (MMIC) is a quantitative instrument developed to assess informed choice for Down syndrome screening (DSS). We have validated a modified MMIC for NIPT and measured informed choice among women offered NIPT in a public health service. The measure was distributed to women recruited across eight maternity units in the United Kingdom who had accepted DSS. Construct validity was assessed by simultaneously conducting qualitative interviews. Five hundred and eighty-five questionnaires were completed and 45 interviews conducted after blood-draw (or equivalent for those that declined NIPT). The measure demonstrated good internal consistency and internal validity. Results indicate the vast majority of women (89%) made an informed choice; 95% were judged to have good knowledge, 88% had a positive attitude and 92% had deliberated. Of the 11% judged to have made an uninformed choice, 55% had not deliberated, 41% had insufficient knowledge, and 19% had a negative attitude. Ethnicity (OR=2.78, P=0.003) and accepting NIPT (OR=16.05, P=0.021) were found to be significant predictors of informed choice. The high rate of informed choice is likely to reflect the importance placed on the provision of pre-test counselling in this study. It will be vital to ensure that this is maintained once NIPT is offered in routine clinical practice.

Enhancing Informed Choice for Genetic Screening: A Pilot Study

Birth defects are the leading cause of infant mortality. New tests offer screening for many fetal aneuploidies. These tests are offered very early in pregnancy and clients are faced with many options. This has made the education of the client more challenging and threatens the ability of the client to make an informed choice. The purpose of this project was to measure the level of informed choice women reported after making a decision on whether or not to have the many optional prenatal genetic screening tests. The level of informed choice was measured using the Multi-dimensional Measure of Informed Choice (MMIC), at a Midwestern private OB-GYN office. This capstone project was a small pilot study which included 26 prenatal clients. Seventy-five percent of the prenatal clients had good knowledge and 57 percent made an informed choice. Future studies and methods will focus on improving this reported level.

Development of a fragile X syndrome (FXS) knowledge scale: towards a modified multidimensional measure of informed choice for FXS population carrier screening

Genetic carrier screening is increasingly possible for many conditions, but it is important to ensure decisions are informed. The multidimensional measure of informed choice (MMIC) is a quantitative instrument developed to evaluate informed choice in prenatal screening for Down syndrome, measuring knowledge, attitudes and uptake. To apply the MMIC in other screening settings, the knowledge scale must be modified. To develop and validate a modified MMIC knowledge scale for use with women undergoing carrier screening for fragile X syndrome (FXS). Responses to MMIC items were collected through questionnaires as part of a FXS carrier screening pilot study in a preconception setting in Melbourne, Australia. Ten knowledge scale items were developed using a modified Delphi technique. Cronbach's alpha and factor analysis were used to validate the new FXS knowledge scale. We summarized the knowledge, attitudes and informed choice status based on the modified MMIC. Two hundred and eighty-five women were recruited, 241 eligible questionnaires were complete for analysis. The FXS knowledge scale items measured one salient construct and were internally consistent (alpha=0.70). 71% (172/241) of participants were classified as having good knowledge, 70% (169/241) had positive attitudes and 27% (65/241) made an informed choice to accept or decline screening. We present the development of a knowledge scale as part of a MMIC to evaluate informed choice in population carrier screening for FXS. This can be used as a template by other researchers to develop knowledge scales for other conditions for use in the MMIC.

The validation and translation of Multidimensional Measure of Informed Choice in Greek

Objective to translate the original English version of the Multidimensional Measure of Informed Choice (MMIC) into Greek, to adapt it culturally to Greece, and to determine its psychometric properties for the assessment of informed choice in antenatal screening for Down syndrome. Design survey using self-administrated questionnaires. Setting public hospital in Athens, Greece. Participants 135 pregnant women with gestational age between 11th and 20th week just prior to having antenatal screening for Down syndrome. Findings 96% of women had a positive attitude towards screening and 45% had a good level of knowledge concerning the screening process for Down syndrome. Using a standard measure of informed choice, validated for use in Greek, it was found that 44% of women made an informed choice, and thus 56% of women made an uninformed choice. The internal consistency of the scales was good; Cronbach's alpha was found to be 0.76 for the attitude scale and 0.64 for the knowledge scale, suggesting that all items were appropriate to measure. The performed factor analysis of the attitude scale indicated three factors with an eigenvalue over 1.0. Those factors were responsible for 87% of the variance. Key conclusions this study indicates that the Greek version of the MMIC appears to be a reliable and valid tool for measuring informed choice in antenatal screening for Down syndrome. Due to its short length and consumption of time, it seems to be a practical instrument for use in Greek antenatal clinics.

Informed choice in women attending private clinics to undergo first-trimester screening for Down syndrome

Informed choice for prenatal screening has long been considered an essential aspect of service provision, and has been researched extensively in the second trimester. This study aims at examining whether women having first-trimester screening in a private clinic had made an informed choice. A cross-sectional survey recruited women having first-trimester screening at specialist ultrasound practices. Two questionnaires containing a validated Multidimensional Measure of Informed Choice (MMIC) were self-administered pre- and post-screening. MMIC was completed by 81% (163/202) of women. Ninety-nine percent of women had a positive attitude towards screening, therefore informed choice was essentially measured on knowledge alone. Pre-screening, 68% made an informed choice, compared with 74% post-screening (chi2 = 1.6, p = 0.21 (McNemar)). Knowledge was associated with education level, information sources and perception of screening as routine or optional. The Australasian Guidelines on prenatal screening state that all women having testing should be provided with written information, and it should be ensured that they have appropriate understanding of the test(s). These guidelines are not being met, even in private clinical care. Health professionals should ensure that all women are provided with suitable information about prenatal screening that is tailored to their level of education and individual needs, and should emphasise that screening is optional.

Informed choice: understanding knowledge in the context of screening uptake

This study evaluates a scale measuring knowledge about a screening test and investigates the association between knowledge, uptake and attitudes towards screening. One thousand four hundred ninety-nine pregnant women completed the knowledge scale of the multidimensional measure of informed choice (MMIC). Three hundred forty-five of these women and 152 professionals providing antenatal care also rated the importance of the knowledge items. Item characteristic curves show that, with one exception, the knowledge items reflect a spread of difficulty and are able to discriminate between people. All items were seen as essential or helpful by both women and health professionals, with two items seen as particularly important and one as unimportant. There were some differences between health professionals, women with low risk results and women with high risk results. Knowledge was not associated with uptake, attitude, or the extent to which uptake was consistent with women’s attitudes towards undergoing the test.

The multi-dimensional measure of informed choice: a validation study

The aim of this prospective study is to assess the reliability and validity of a multi-dimensional measure of informed choice (MMIC). Participants were 225 pregnant women in two general hospitals in the UK, women receiving low-risk results following serum screening for Down syndrome. The MMIC was administered before testing and the Ottawa Decisional Conflict Scale was administered 6 weeks later. The component scales of the MMIC, knowledge and attitude, were internally consistent (alpha values of 0.68 and 0.78, respectively). Those who made a choice categorised as informed using the MMIC rated their decision 6 weeks later as being more informed, better supported and of higher quality than women whose choice was categorised as uninformed. This provides evidence of predictive validity, whilst the lack of association between the MMIC and anxiety shows construct (discriminant) validity. Thus, the MMIC has been shown to be psychometrically robust in pregnant women offered the choice to undergo prenatal screening for Down syndrome and receiving a low-risk result. Replication of this finding in other groups, facing other decisions, with other outcomes, should be assessed in future research.