How personal experiences feature in women's accounts of use of information for decisions about antenatal diagnostic testing for foetal abnormality.

There has been a striking growth in the availability of health-related information based on personal experience in recent years and internet users are often drawn towards other people's stories about their health. Accounts of other people's experiences might convey social and emotional information that is not otherwise available but little is known about how it is used or the implications of its use in practice. This paper examines how people refer to information about other people's experiences when accounting for decisions about antenatal diagnostic testing for foetal abnormality. We conducted a secondary analysis of 37 qualitative interviews undertaken across the UK with 36 women and nine of their male partners (eight couples were interviewed together) who talked about diagnostic testing for foetal abnormality in 55 pregnancies. When describing their decisions, respondents referred to examples of knowledge gleaned from their own and other individuals' experiences as well as information based on biomedical or clinical-epidemiological research (usually about the probabilities of having a child affected by health problems or the probability of diagnostic tests causing miscarriage). Both forms of knowledge were employed in people's accounts to illustrate the legitimacy and internal coherence of decisions taken. The analysis demonstrates the personally idiosyncratic ways that people reflect on and incorporate different types of information to add meaning to abstract ideas about risk, to imagine the consequences for their own lives and to help them to make sense of the decisions they faced.

[1]  A. Giddens The consequences of modernity , 1990 .

[2]  S. Markens,et al.  Interrogating the dynamics between power, knowledge and pregnant bodies in amniocentesis decision making. , 2010, Sociology of health & illness.

[3]  A. Lippman Embodied Knowledge and Making Sense of Prenatal Diagnosis , 1999, Journal of Genetic Counseling.

[4]  Alexander J. Rothman,et al.  Treating people with information: an analysis and review of approaches to communicating health risk information. , 1999, Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs.

[5]  Sue Ziebland,et al.  Making sense of qualitative data analysis: an introduction with illustrations from DIPEx (personal experiences of health and illness) , 2006, Medical education.

[6]  S. Greenhalgh,et al.  Pragmatic women and body politics , 1998 .

[7]  Yiannis Gabriel The voice of experience and the voice of the expert: can they speak to each other? , 2008 .

[8]  Lorraine Code Taking Subjectivity into Account , 2012 .

[9]  T. Greenhalgh,et al.  Narrative Research in Health and Illness , 2004 .

[10]  D. Coyle,et al.  Exploring informed choice in the context of prenatal testing: findings from a qualitative study , 2008, Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy.

[11]  J. Heaton Reworking Qualitative Data , 2004 .

[12]  C. Browner,et al.  Latinas, Amniocentesis and the Discourse of Choice , 2000, Culture, medicine and psychiatry.

[13]  J. Kai,et al.  Parents' experiences of universal screening for haemoglobin disorders: implications for practice in a new genetics era. , 2008, The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners.

[14]  Michael Billig,et al.  Accounts of health and illness: Dilemmas and representations , 1996 .

[15]  I. Shaw How Lay Are Lay Beliefs? , 2002 .

[16]  C. Emslie,et al.  Commentary: the prevention paradox in lay epidemiology--Rose revisited. , 2001, International journal of epidemiology.

[17]  M. Golbus,et al.  Decision making: whether or not to have prenatal diagnosis and abortion for X-linked conditions. , 1985, American journal of medical genetics.

[18]  G. Smith,et al.  Inheriting heart trouble: the relevance of common-sense ideas to preventive measures , 1989 .

[19]  Peter R. Harris,et al.  How do patients evaluate and make use of online health information? , 2007, Social science & medicine.

[20]  D. Timmermans,et al.  The impact of ethical beliefs on decisions about prenatal screening tests: searching for justification. , 2008, Social science & medicine.

[21]  S. Ziebland,et al.  Information for choice: what people need, prefer and use - Report for the National Institute for Health Research Service Delivery and Organisation programme , 2010 .

[22]  K. Atkin,et al.  Decision-Making and Ante-Natal Screening for Sickle Cell and Thalassaemia Disorders , 2008 .

[23]  S. Ziebland,et al.  How the internet affects patients' experience of cancer: a qualitative study , 2004, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[24]  G. Watt,et al.  Lay constructions of a family history of heart disease: potential for misunderstandings in the clinical encounter? , 2001, The Lancet.

[25]  A. Tversky,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.

[26]  D. Coyle,et al.  The influence of experiential knowledge on prenatal screening and testing decisions. , 2008, Genetic testing.

[27]  T. Newman The Power of Stories Over Statistics: Lessons from Neonatal Jaundice and Infant Airplane Safety , 2008 .

[28]  Michael Bury,et al.  Illness narratives: fact or fiction? , 2001 .

[29]  Mark Conner,et al.  Does narrative information bias individual's decision making? A systematic review. , 2008, Social science & medicine.

[30]  T. Borkman Experiential Knowledge: A New Concept for the Analysis of Self-Help Groups , 1976, Social Service Review.

[31]  Rebecca Schaffer,et al.  Producing genetic knowledge and citizenship through the Internet: mothers, pediatric genetics, and cybermedicine. , 2008, Sociology of health & illness.

[32]  G. Smith,et al.  Lay epidemiology and the prevention paradox: the implications of coronary candidacy for health education , 1991 .