Article

Knowledge Transfer and Translation: Examining how Teratogen Information is Disseminated

University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Birth Defects Research Part A Clinical and Molecular Teratology (Impact Factor: 2.21). 11/2011; 91(11):956-61. DOI: 10.1002/bdra.22851
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Well-executed knowledge transfer and translation (KT) has become a vital part of effective health management. Following the thalidomide disaster, women and their health care providers became fearful of medications and environmental exposures that could affect the health of the unborn child. Therefore, it is important to disseminate evidenced-based information to pregnant women and their health care providers, enabling them to make empowered decisions regarding exposures during pregnancy.
The objectives were twofold: (1) to explore the knowledge transfer process of teratology information from the research community to health care providers, pregnant women, and the general public; and (2) to examine how this impacts pregnant women and their health care providers who require this information.
We searched the peer reviewed literature (PUBMED, MEDLINE, and EMBASE), retrieved and examined original studies and review articles, and identified relevant data to evaluate how KT is conducted in this field.
We found that KT and teratology information is very complex, with confusing information, over-estimated fears of teratogenicity, as well as unhelpful, often negatively biased information from the media. Of all the methods we identified, Teratogen Information Services (TIS) appears to conduct the most effective KT approaches in this field.
It is evident that KT in this area needs improvement. Women and their health care providers are highly impacted by the type of teratology information they receive, affecting for example, deciding to terminate a wanted pregnancy or discontinue a needed pharmacotherapy. When disseminating information in this very sensitive and complex field, it is imperative that good KT strategies are used, encompassing the availability and appropriate interpretation of information. It is most important that an evidence-based decision is made to ensure the optimal outcome for both the mother and her unborn child.

0 Followers
 · 
114 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: An association between PPHN and antidepressant use in pregnancy has been reported. We sought to examine this relationship. A review of the literature was performed, to evaluate this association. Six published studies fulfilled our criteria for inclusion, with only three studies large enough to have the power to detect an association. There appears to be a small but significantly, increased risk of late pregnancy SSRI exposure associated with PPHN in one case-control study; OR 5.1 (95% CI, 1.9-13.3) and two large cohort studies; RR 2.56; (95% CI, 1.17-4.85) and OR 2.1 (95% CI, 1.5-3.0) The other three studies did not find an association. the absolute risk cannot be determined, but it is very small, probably less than 1%. If a pregnant woman requires pharmacological treatment, this information does not support discontinuation or lowering the dose of the antidepressant.
    Reproductive Toxicology 05/2012; 34(3):293-7. DOI:10.1016/j.reprotox.2012.04.015 · 2.77 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Funding for Teratology Information Services has been an ongoing struggle over the 25 years of its existence. Traditional and novel funding mechanisms have been explored with varying success. The importance of providing teratology risk assessment and counseling to all women of reproductive age is now an established health care objective. Sufficient and stable funding for these services is essential.
    Birth Defects Research Part A Clinical and Molecular Teratology 08/2012; 94(8):660-3. DOI:10.1002/bdra.23020 · 2.21 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Subpart B of 45 Code of Federal Regulations Part 46 (CFR) identifies the criteria according to which research involving pregnant women, human fetuses, and neonates can be conducted ethically in the United States. As such, pregnant women and fetuses fall into a category requiring "additional protections," often referred to as "vulnerable populations." The CFR does not define vulnerability, but merely gives examples of vulnerable groups by pointing to different categories of potential research subjects needing additional protections. In this paper, I assess critically the role of this categorization of pregnant women involved in research as "vulnerable," both as separate entities and in combination with the fetuses they carry. In particular, I do three things: (1) demonstrate that pregnant women qua pregnancy are either not "vulnerable" according to any meaningful definition of that term or that such vulnerability is irrelevant to her status as a research participant; (2) argue that while a fetus may be vulnerable in terms of dependency, this categorization does not equate to the vulnerability of the pregnant woman; and (3) suggest that any vulnerability that appends to women is precisely the result of federal regulations and dubious public perceptions about pregnant women. I conclude by demonstrating how this erroneous characterization of pregnant women as "vulnerable" and its associated protections have not only impeded vital research for pregnant women and their fetuses, but have also negatively affected the inclusion of all women in clinical research.
    Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 05/2013; 34(3). DOI:10.1007/s11017-013-9258-0 · 0.78 Impact Factor
Show more