Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 10, 2026
07:34
FISH for Pre-implantation Genetic Diagnosis
Published on: February 24, 2011
Justifying prenatal screening and genetic amniocentesis programs by cost-effectiveness analyses: a re-evaluation
1UCSD Health Outcomes Assessment Program and the Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, University of California-San Diego School of Medicine, La Jolla, USA.
Summary
Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) inadequately evaluates prenatal screening and genetic amniocentesis programs by omitting the potential life of aborted fetuses. This omission leads to misleading conclusions, questioning CEA
Area of Science:
- Health Economics
- Medical Ethics
- Public Health Policy
Background:
- Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) is a valuable tool in health policy, requiring comprehensive evaluation of all options, variables, and outcomes.
- Despite its utility, existing CEA studies on prenatal screening and genetic amniocentesis programs are incomplete.
- These analyses often fail to fully incorporate the value of potential life, particularly concerning aborted fetuses.
Purpose of the Study:
- To critically evaluate the completeness of current cost-effectiveness analyses for prenatal screening and genetic amniocentesis programs.
- To identify the ramifications of incomplete evaluations in these specific healthcare contexts.
- To determine the appropriateness of cost-effectiveness analysis as a justification tool for these prenatal programs.
Main Methods:
- Literature review of published cost-effectiveness analyses concerning prenatal screening and genetic amniocentesis.
- Conceptual analysis of the principles of cost-effectiveness analysis and their application to reproductive health.
- Examination of ethical and societal perspectives on valuing potential life in economic evaluations.
Main Results:
- Published cost-effectiveness analyses of prenatal screening and genetic amniocentesis programs are incomplete.
- These analyses inadequately acknowledge the value of potential fetal life, violating core CEA principles.
- The incomplete evaluations produce potentially misleading conclusions regarding program justification.
Conclusions:
- Cost-effectiveness analysis, in its current application, is not a suitable tool for justifying prenatal screening or genetic amniocentesis programs.
- A more comprehensive framework is needed to evaluate these programs, including ethical considerations of potential life.
- Further societal discussion is required to define appropriate outcomes for evaluating reproductive health interventions using economic models.
Keywords:
Genetics and Reproduction
Related Concept Videos
02:46Genetic Screens
Genetic screens are tools used to identify genes and mutations responsible for phenotypes of interest. Genetic screens help identify individuals or a group of people at risk of developing genetic diseases and help them with early intervention, targeted therapy, and reproductive options.
Forward genetic screens
Forward or “classical” genetic screens involve creating random mutations in an organism’s DNA using radiation, mutagens, or insertion of additional bases, which result in visible changes...
Forward genetic screens
Forward or “classical” genetic screens involve creating random mutations in an organism’s DNA using radiation, mutagens, or insertion of additional bases, which result in visible changes...
01:30Preventive Healthcare Services
Preventive healthcare services keep people healthy via frequent check-ups, screening, and counseling. They primarily aid in disease prevention rather than treating an acute or chronic illness. Preventive treatment also keeps individuals productive and energetic, allowing them to work well into their retirement years. Examples of preventive care services include:
01:23Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Biopharmaceutical studies constitute a vital field aiming to enhance drug delivery methods and refine therapeutic approaches, drawing upon diverse interdisciplinary knowledge. In research methodologies, the choice between controlled and non-controlled studies significantly influences the study's reliability and accuracy.
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...