Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2019 Jan;143(Suppl 1):S6-S13.
doi: 10.1542/peds.2018-1099C.

Perceived Benefits, Risks, and Utility of Newborn Genomic Sequencing in the BabySeq Project

Collaborators, Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Perceived Benefits, Risks, and Utility of Newborn Genomic Sequencing in the BabySeq Project

Stacey Pereira et al. Pediatrics. 2019 Jan.

Abstract

Background and objectives: There is interest in applying genomic sequencing (GS) to newborns' clinical care. Here we explore parents' and clinicians' attitudes toward and perceptions of the risks, benefits, and utility of newborn GS compared with newborn screening (NBS) prior to receiving study results.

Methods: The BabySeq Project is a randomized controlled trial used to explore the impact of integrating GS into the clinical care of newborns. Parents (n = 493) of enrolled infants (n = 309) and clinicians (n = 144) completed a baseline survey at enrollment. We examined between-group differences in perceived utility and attitudes toward NBS and GS. Open-ended responses about risks and benefits of each technology were categorized by theme.

Results: The majority of parents (71%) and clinicians (51%) agreed that there are health benefits of GS, although parents and clinicians agreed more that there are risks associated with GS (35%, 70%) than with NBS (19%, 39%; all P < .05). Parents perceived more benefit and less risk of GS than did clinicians. Clinicians endorsed concerns about privacy and discrimination related to genomic information more strongly than did parents, and parents anticipated benefits of GS that clinicians did not.

Conclusions: Parents and clinicians are less confident in GS than NBS, but parents perceive a more favorable risk/benefit ratio of GS than do clinicians. Clinicians should be aware that parents' optimism may stem from their perceived benefits beyond clinical utility.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02422511.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST: Dr Green is a cofounder, advisor, and equity holder in Genome Medical, Inc; the other authors have indicated they have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Parents’ perceived utility. Parents’ perceived utility is measured on an importance scale that ranges from 1 to 5 in which 1 indicates no importance and 5 indicates high importance. Error bars represent SEs.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. King JS, Smith ME. Whole-genome screening of newborns? The constitutional boundaries of state newborn screening programs. Pediatrics. 2016;137(suppl 1):S8–S15 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Botkin JR. Ethical issues in pediatric genetic testing and screening. Curr Opin Pediatr. 2016;28(6):700–704 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Serving the family from birth to the medical home. A report from the Newborn Screening Task Force convened in Washington DC, May 10-11, 1999. Pediatrics. 2000;106(2 pt 2):383–427 - PubMed
    1. Friedman JM, Cornel MC, Goldenberg AJ, Lister KJ, Sénécal K, Vears DF; Global Alliance for Genomics and Health Regulatory and Ethics Working Group Paediatric Task Team. Genomic newborn screening: public health policy considerations and recommendations. BMC Med Genomics. 2017;10(1):9. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Saunders CJ, Miller NA, Soden SE, et al. Rapid whole-genome sequencing for genetic disease diagnosis in neonatal intensive care units. Sci Transl Med. 2012;4(154):154ra135 - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data