The paradox of choice: Antenatal screening and decision-making

2016 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 236-236
Author(s):  
George F Winter
Midwifery ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 297-302 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janneke T. Gitsels-van der Wal ◽  
Judith Manniën ◽  
Mohammed M. Ghaly ◽  
Pieternel S. Verhoeven ◽  
Eileen K. Hutton ◽  
...  

2009 ◽  
Vol 69 (11) ◽  
pp. 1561-1573 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernie Reid ◽  
Marlene Sinclair ◽  
Owen Barr ◽  
Frank Dobbs ◽  
Grainne Crealey

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Callen Kwamboka Onyambu ◽  
Norah Mukiri Tharamba

Congenital fetal anomalies contribute to the global burden of disease in children. Various screening programs have been used for antenatal screening of these anomalies. Screening targets low risk population and is usually done in the second trimester though some are done at the mother’s first antenatal visit especially in resource constrained setting. Mother’s who have had a previous pregnancy with congenital anomaly are given targeted elaborate screening. Early diagnosis of this anomalies can lead to early intervention and better outcomes. Diagnosis of the malformations also leads to clinical decision making on mode of delivery thereby avoiding birth related trauma to the mother and the baby. In case of lethal congenital anomalies early diagnosis aids in clinical decision making on the management of the pregnancy.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dong Dong ◽  
Shenaz Ahmed ◽  
Elena Nichini ◽  
Huso Yi ◽  
Hussain Jafri ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Simen ◽  
Fuat Balcı

AbstractRahnev & Denison (R&D) argue against normative theories and in favor of a more descriptive “standard observer model” of perceptual decision making. We agree with the authors in many respects, but we argue that optimality (specifically, reward-rate maximization) has proved demonstrably useful as a hypothesis, contrary to the authors’ claims.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document