In reply: Our aims in publishing the outcomes of offering cystic fibrosis (CF) carrier testing to couples were to demonstrate the high acceptability rate and report the reproductive choices made by high-risk couples. Not all decisions resulted in termination.
The full article is accessible to AMA members and paid subscribers. Login to read more or purchase a subscription now.
Please note: institutional and Research4Life access to the MJA is now provided through Wiley Online Library.
- 1 Hunter Genetics, Newcastle, NSW.
- 2 Department of Laboratory and Community Genetics, Pacific Laboratory Medicine Services, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, NSW.
Correspondence: Louise.Christie@hnehealth.nsw.gov.au
- 1. Human Genetics Society of Australasia. Cystic fibrosis population screening position paper. (Document No. PP01.) Sydney: HGSA, 2009. http://www.hgsa.com.au/images/UserFiles/Attachments/CysticFibrosisPositionPaper.pdf (accessed Dec 2009).
- 2. Massie RJ, Olsen M, Glazner J, et al. Newborn screening for cystic fibrosis in Victoria: 10 years’ experience (1989–1998). Med J Aust 2000; 172: 584-587.
- 3. Wildhagen M, Hilderink H, Verzijl J, Verheij J. Costs, effects, and savings of screening for cystic fibrosis gene carriers. J Epidemiol Community Health 1998; 52: 459-467.
- 4. Rowley PT, Loader S, Kaplan RM. Prenatal screening for cystic fibrosis carrier: an economic evaluation. Am J Hum Genet 1998; 63: 1160-1174.
- 5. Radhakrishnan M, Van Gool K, Hall J, et al. Economic evaluation of cystic fibrosis screening: a review of the literature. Health Policy 2008; 85: 133-147.
Online responses are no longer available. Please refer to our instructions for authors page for more information.