title: Health-care providers' views on pursuing reproductive benefit through newborn screening: the case of sickle cell disorders.
abstract: Newborn screening (NBS) programs aim to identify affected infants before the onset of treatable disorders. Historically, benefits to the family and society were considered secondary to this clinical benefit; yet, recent discourse defending expanded NBS has argued that screening can in part be justified by secondary benefits, such as learning reproductive risk information to support family planning ('reproductive benefit'). Despite increased attention to these secondary benefits of NBS, stakeholders' values remain unknown. We report a mixed methods study that included an examination of providers' views toward the pursuit of reproductive risk information through NBS, using sickle cell disorder carrier status as an example. We surveyed a stratified random sample of 1615 providers in Ontario, and interviewed 42 providers across 7 disciplines. A majority endorsed the identification of reproductive risks as a goal of NBS (74-77%). Providers' dominant rationale was that knowledge of carrier status is an important and inherent benefit of NBS as it allows people to make reproductive choices, which is consistent with the goals of disease prevention. However, some challenged its appropriateness, questioning its logic, timing and impact on disease prevention. Others were sensitive to intruding on individuals' choices or children's independent rights. While the dominant view is consistent with discourse defending expanded NBS, it deviates from the traditional screening principles that underpin most public health interventions. Broader discussion of the balance between benefits to screened individuals and those to families and societies, in the context of public health programs, is needed.
authors.affiliation: Department of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
authors.forename: Yvonne
authors.initials: Y
authors.lastname: Bombard
authors.forename: Fiona A
authors.initials: FA
authors.lastname: Miller
authors.forename: Robin Z
authors.initials: RZ
authors.lastname: Hayeems
authors.forename: Brenda J
authors.initials: BJ
authors.lastname: Wilson
authors.forename: June C
authors.initials: JC
authors.lastname: Carroll
authors.forename: Martha
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Paynter
authors.forename: Julian
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Little
authors.forename: Judith
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Allanson
authors.forename: Jessica P
authors.initials: JP
authors.lastname: Bytautas
authors.forename: Pranesh
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Chakraborty
mesh_terms: D000755:Anemia, Sickle Cell / Q000175:diagnosis*; D005190:Family; D005260:Female; D006282:Health Personnel / Q000941:ethics*; D006801:Humans; D007231:Infant, Newborn; D008297:Male; D015997:Neonatal Screening / Q000941:ethics / Q000379:methods*; D017410:Practice Guidelines as Topic; D011296:Prenatal Diagnosis / Q000379:methods; D012098:Reproduction
references.citation: Pediatrics. 2009 Sep;124(3):950-8
references.pmid: 19706578
references.citation: Nat Rev Genet. 2009 Oct;10(10):666-7
references.pmid: 19763150
references.citation: Res Nurs Health. 2000 Aug;23(4):334-40
references.pmid: 10940958
references.citation: Ment Retard Dev Disabil Res Rev. 2006;12(4):270-9
references.pmid: 17183569
references.citation: Am J Public Health. 2005 Nov;95(11):1889-93
references.pmid: 16195526
references.citation: Public Health Genomics. 2010;13(3):181-90
references.pmid: 19776551
references.citation: Nat Rev Genet. 2007 Nov;8(11):828
references.pmid: 17943191
references.citation: Am J Hum Genet. 1974 Sep;26(5):636-59
references.pmid: 4609197
references.citation: Am J Public Health. 1997 Aug;87(8):1280-8
references.pmid: 9279262
references.citation: J Med Ethics. 2009 Oct;35(10):626-34
references.pmid: 19793944
references.citation: Health Technol Assess. 2000;4(3):i-v, 1-99
references.pmid: 10840658
references.citation: Genet Med. 2006 May;8 Suppl 1:1S-252S
references.pmid: 16783161
references.citation: Pediatrics. 2002 Feb;109(2):269-73
references.pmid: 11826206
references.citation: Hum Gene Ther. 1995 Dec;6(12):1595-605
references.pmid: 8664384
references.citation: Pediatrics. 2006 May;117(5 Pt 2):S350-4
references.pmid: 16735262
references.citation: Eur J Hum Genet. 2010 Mar;18(3):303-8
references.pmid: 19809482
references.citation: Am J Med Genet A. 2006 Apr 15;140(8):914-22
references.pmid: 16528755
references.citation: Am J Public Health. 2009 Feb;99(2):210-5
references.pmid: 19059852
references.citation: Pediatrics. 2006 Mar;117(3):923-9
references.pmid: 16510675
references.citation: Kennedy Inst Ethics J. 2010 Dec;20(4):299-328
references.pmid: 21338027
references.citation: Am J Public Health. 2001 Nov;91(11):1776-82
references.pmid: 11684600
references.citation: Eur J Hum Genet. 2010 Jul;18(7):751-60
references.pmid: 20197792