Reproductive Genetic Screening: A Public Health Perspective from the United Kingdom


Public health has several roles in reproductive genetic screening. It should emphasize the voluntary nature of these programs and ensure that people are adequately informed before making decisions and supported afterward. It must ensure that a central coordinating body will monitor the implementation and the outcome of these programs. Public health must also ensure that the definition of ‘success’ or ‘failure’ of a program is not based on too narrow monetary calculations.

Keywords: screening; reproductive; genetic; policy; United Kingdom


Alberman E (2002) The National Down Syndrome Cytogenetic Register (NDSCR). Journal of Medical Screening 9(3): 97–98.

Al‐Jader LN, Goodchild MC, Ryley HC and Harper PS (1990) Attitudes of parents of CF children towards neonatal screening and antenatal diagnosis. Journal of Clinical Genetics 38: 460–465.

Al‐Jader LN and Hopkins S (2000) Development of an antenatal screening programme for congenital abnormalities in a South Wales district; lessons learnt for clinical governance. Community Genetics 3: 31–37.

Al‐Jader LN, and Parry‐Langdon N and Smith RJW (2000) Survey of attitudes of pregnant women towards Down's syndrome screening. Prenatal Diagnosis 20: 23–29.

Beazoglou T, Heffley D, Kyriopoulos J, Vintzileos A and Benn P (1998) Economic evaluation of prenatal screening for Down's syndrome in the USA. Prenatal Diagnosis 18(12): 1241–1252.

Czeizel AE (1995) Nutritional supplementation and prevention of congenital abnormalities. Current Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynaecology 7(2): 88–94.

Glazier R, Goel V, Holzapfel S, et al. (1997) Written patient information about triple‐marker screening: a randomized, controlled trial. Obstetrics & Gynaecology 90(5): 769–774.

Graham W, Smith P, Kamal A, et al. (2000) Randomised controlled trial comparing effectiveness of touch screen system with leaflet for providing women with information on prenatal tests. British Medical Journal 320(7228): 155–160.

Hewison J, Cuckle H, Baillie C, et al. (2001) Use of videotapes for viewing at home to inform choice in Down's syndrome screening: a randomised controlled trial. Prenatal Diagnosis 21(2): 146–149.

Jepson RG, Forbes CA, Sowden AJ and Lewis RA (2001) Increasing informed uptake and non‐uptake of screening: evidence from systematic review. Health Expectations 4(2): 116–130.

Murray J, Cuckle H, Taylor G, Littlewood J and Hewison J (1999) Screening for cystic fibrosis. Health Technology Assessment 3: 8.

Mutton D, Ide RG and Alberman E (1998) Trends in prenatal screening for and diagnosis of Down's syndrome: England and Wales, 1989–97. British Medical Journal 317: 922–923.

Shackley P and Cairns J (1996) Evaluating the benefits of antenatal screening: an alternative approach. Health Policy 36(2): 103–115.

Stone DH and Stewart S (1996) Screening and the new genetics; a public health perspective on the ethical debate. Journal of Public Health Medicine 18(1): 3–5.

Wald JW, Kennard A, Hackshaw A and McGuire A (1998) Antenatal screening for Down's syndrome. Health Technology Assessment 2(1): 99.

Further Reading

Acheson D (1988) Public Health in England – The Report of the Committee of Enquiry into the Future Development of the Public Health Function, Cmd 289. London: Her Majesty's Stationary Office.

Al‐Jader LN (1996) Antenatal Screening for Down Syndrome, part II London, UK: Faculty of Public Health Medicine of the Royal Colleges of Physicians.

Chapple J (1994) Screening Issues – The Public Health Aspect. Prenatal Diagnosis, the Human Side. Abramsky L and Chapple J (eds.) London, UK: Chapman & Hall.

Chilaka VN, Konje JC, Stewart CR, Narayan H and Taylor DJ (2001) Knowledge of Down's syndrome in pregnant women from different ethnic groups. Prenatal Diagnosis 21(3): 159–164.

Cochrane AL and Holland WW (1971) Validation of screening procedures. British Medical Bulletin 27: 3.

Crang‐Svalenius E, Dykes AK and Jorgensen C (1998) Factors influencing informed choice of prenatal diagnosis: women's feelings and attitudes. Fetal Diagnosis 13(1): 53–61.

Ford C, Moore AJ, Jordan PA, et al. (1999) The value of screening for Down's syndrome in a socioeconomically deprived area with high ethnic population. British Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology 105(8): 855–859.

Gilbert RE, Augood C, Gupta R, et al. (2001) Screening for Down's syndrome: effects, safety, and cost effectiveness of first and second trimester strategies. British Medical Journal 323: 423.

Gray JAM (1996) Dimensions and Definitions of Screening. Milton Keynes, UK: NHS Executive Anglia and Oxford, Research and Development Directorate.

Holland WW and Stewart S (1990) Screening in Healthcare: Benefit or Loss. The Nuffield Provincial Hospitals Trust, UK.

Howe D (2001) Modeling does not reflect reality. British Medical Journal 323 (7310): 423.

Jorgensen FS (1996) Attitude of pregnant women to prenatal screening. Ugeskrift for Laeger 158(39): 5447–5452.

Raffle AE (2001) Information about screening – is it to achieve high uptake or to ensure informed choice? Health in Expectancy 4(2): 92–98.

Reynolds TM (2000) Down's syndrome screening: a controversial test, with more controversy to come! Journal of Clinical Pathology 53(12): 893–898.

Sackett DL and Holland WW (1975) Controversy in the detection of disease. Lancet 2: 357–359.

Searle J (1997) Routine antenatal screening: not a case of informed choice. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 21(3): 268–274.

Stemerding D and van Berkel D (2001) Maternal serum screening, political decision‐making and social learning. Health Policy 56(2): 111–125.

Wald NJ (ed.) (1984) Antenatal and Neonatal Screening. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Wilson JMG and Jungner G (1968) Principles and Practice of Screening for Disease, Public Health Paper No. 34. Geneva: WHO.

Web Links

The National Screening Committee Library. This is a library of literature published by the UK National Screening Committee of the Department of Health. It advises ministers on matters related to screening programmes

Public Health Genetics Unit. The UK National Health Service funds the Public Health Genetics Unit. Its Web site provides news and information about advances in genetics and their impact on public health and the prevention of disease

Contact Editor close
Submit a note to the editor about this article by filling in the form below.

* Required Field

How to Cite close
Al‐Jader, Layla(Sep 2006) Reproductive Genetic Screening: A Public Health Perspective from the United Kingdom. In: eLS. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Chichester. [doi: 10.1002/9780470015902.a0005640]