1
|
Bet BB, Wielart L, Ravelli ACJ, van Wely M, van Leeuwen E, Pajkrt E. Financial contribution as reason to opt out of non-invasive prenatal testing. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2023; 287:130-136. [PMID: 37311275 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2023.06.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/04/2023] [Revised: 05/03/2023] [Accepted: 06/06/2023] [Indexed: 06/15/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE First trimester non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) provides pregnant women with a reliable, non-invasive method to screen for fetal aneuploidies. In the Netherlands, there is a nationwide prenatal screening program in which pregnant women and their partners are counseled about their options around 10 weeks of pregnancy. The first trimester and second trimester scan are fully reimbursed but the NIPT has an own financial contribution of €175 per participant, irrespective of type of insurance. The arguments for this own contribution are fear of uncritical use of NIPT or routinization. NIPT has a relatively stable uptake of 51%, against over 95% for second trimester anomaly scan. We aimed to explore the effect of this financial contribution on the decision to opt out of NIPT. STUDY DESIGN We performed a survey among 350 pregnant women undergoing a second trimester anomaly scan in our center, Amsterdam UMC, between January 2021 and April 2022. All pregnant women who declined NIPT in the first trimester, were asked to participate and answered 11-13 questions about the decision-making process, the reasons to opt out and the financial contribution. RESULTS Information about NIPT was desired in 92% of women and 96% felt sufficiently informed. Most women took the decision not to perform NIPT with their partner and did not experience difficulties in taking this decision. The most important reason to decline NIPT was: "Every child is welcome" (69%). "The test was too expensive" was answered in 12% and was significantly correlated with lower maternal age. Additionally, one in five women (19%) said they would have done NIPT if it had been for free, which was significantly higher in younger women. CONCLUSIONS The own financial contribution plays a role in the decision-making to decline NIPT and partly explains the low uptake in the Netherlands. This suggests that there is no equal access to fetal aneuploidy screening. To overcome this inequality, this own contribution should be abandoned. We speculate that this will have a positive effect on the uptake, which will increase to at least 70% and potentially 94%.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bo B Bet
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam Reproduction and Development, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | - Lot Wielart
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Anita C J Ravelli
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam Reproduction and Development, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Medical Informatics, Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Madelon van Wely
- Amsterdam Reproduction and Development, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Centre for Reproductive Medicine, Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Elisabeth van Leeuwen
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam Reproduction and Development, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Eva Pajkrt
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam Reproduction and Development, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Damman OC, Henneman L, IJssel DVVD, Timmermans DRM. Conditions for autonomous reproductive decision-making in prenatal screening: A mixed methods study. Midwifery 2023; 119:103607. [PMID: 36753831 DOI: 10.1016/j.midw.2023.103607] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/13/2020] [Revised: 07/18/2022] [Accepted: 01/26/2023] [Indexed: 01/30/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Pregnant women should be able to make autonomous and meaningful decisions about prenatal screening for fetal abnormalities. It remains largely unclear which circumstances facilitate or hinder such a decision-making process. OBJECTIVE To investigate what conditions Dutch pregnant women and professional experts consider important for autonomous reproductive decision-making in prenatal screening for fetal abnormalities, and the extent to which, according to women, those conditions are met in practice. METHODS A mixed methods study was conducted in the Netherlands in 2016-2017. A conceptual model was used to interview professional experts (n = 16) and pregnant women (n = 19). Thematic analysis was performed to identify important conditions. Subsequently, a questionnaire assessed the perceived importance of those conditions and the extent to which these were met, in the experience of pregnant women (n = 200). RESULTS Professional experts stressed the importance of information provision, and emphasized a rational decision-making model. Pregnant women differed in what information they felt was needed, and this depended on the screening decision made. Questionnaire findings showed that women prioritized discussion and consensus with partners. Information about test accuracy and miscarriage risk of invasive follow-up testing was also considered important. Two key conditions were not adequately met, in the experience of women: (1) having information about miscarriage risk; (2) not being directed by health professionals in decision-making. CONCLUSION According to women, discussion and consensus with partners was considered a highly important condition for an autonomous and meaningful decision-making process. Access to information about safety of testing and ensuring that women are not being directed in their decision-making by health professionals seem to be areas for improvement in prenatal care practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Olga C Damman
- Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Lidewij Henneman
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Section Community Genetics, Amsterdam Reproduction and Development Research Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Dalisa V van den IJssel
- Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Danielle R M Timmermans
- Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
van der Meij KRM, de Groot-van Mooren M, Carbo EWS, Pieters MJ, Rodenburg W, Sistermans EA, Cornel MC, Henneman L. Uptake of fetal aneuploidy screening after the introduction of the non-invasive prenatal test: A national population-based register study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2021; 100:1265-1272. [PMID: 33465829 PMCID: PMC8359325 DOI: 10.1111/aogs.14091] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/10/2020] [Revised: 01/08/2021] [Accepted: 01/15/2021] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The introduction of the non-invasive prenatal test (NIPT) has shifted the prenatal screening landscape. Countries are exploring ways to integrate NIPT in their national prenatal screening programs, either as a first- or second-tier test. This study aimed to describe how the uptake of fetal aneuploidy screening changed after the introduction of NIPT as a second-tier and as a first-tier test within the national prenatal screening program of the Netherlands. MATERIAL AND METHODS A population-based register study in the Netherlands, recording uptake of fetal aneuploidy screening. Data from all pregnant women choosing to have the first-trimester combined test (FCT) or first-tier NIPT between January 2007 and March 2019 were retrospectively collected using national registration systems. Uptake percentages for fetal aneuploidy screening (FCT and NIPT) were calculated and stratified by region and maternal age. Statistical significance was determined using trend analysis and chi-squared tests. RESULTS Between 2007 and 2013 FCT uptake increased from 14.8% to 29.5% (P = .004). In April 2014 NIPT was introduced as a second-tier test for high-risk women after FCT (TRIDENT-1 study). FCT uptake rose from 29.5% in 2013 to 34.2% in 2015 (P < .0001). After the introduction of NIPT as a first-tier test for all women in April 2017 (TRIDENT-2 study), FCT uptake declined significantly from 35.8% in 2016 to 2.6% in 2018 (P < .0001). NIPT uptake increased to 43.4% in 2018. Regionally, NIPT uptake ranged from 31.8% to 67.9%. Total uptake (FCT and NIPT) between 2007 and 2018 increased significantly from 14.8% to 45.9% (P < .0001). However, total uptake stabilized at 46% for both years of TRIDENT-2 (April 2017-March 2019). CONCLUSIONS An increase in total fetal aneuploidy screening uptake up to 45.9% was observed after the introduction of NIPT. Uptake appears to have stabilized within a year after introducing first-tier NIPT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Karuna R M van der Meij
- Department of Clinical Genetics and Amsterdam Reproduction & Development Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Maurike de Groot-van Mooren
- Department of Pediatrics and Amsterdam Reproduction & Development Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Ellen W S Carbo
- Center for Health Protection, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, the Netherlands
| | - Mijntje J Pieters
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, GROW School of Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands.,Foundation Prenatal Screening Southeast Region of the Netherlands, Maastricht, the Netherlands, On Behalf of the Regional Centers for Prenatal Screening, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Wendy Rodenburg
- Center for Health Protection, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, the Netherlands
| | - Erik A Sistermans
- Department of Clinical Genetics and Amsterdam Reproduction & Development Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Martina C Cornel
- Department of Clinical Genetics and Amsterdam Reproduction & Development Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Lidewij Henneman
- Department of Clinical Genetics and Amsterdam Reproduction & Development Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Bunnik EM, Kater-Kuipers A, Galjaard RJH, de Beaufort I. Why NIPT should be publicly funded. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS 2020; 46:783-784. [PMID: 32277019 PMCID: PMC7656139 DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2020-106218] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/17/2020] [Accepted: 03/26/2020] [Indexed: 05/16/2023]
Abstract
Asking pregnant women to (co)pay for non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) out of pocket leads to unequal access across socioeconomic strata. To avoid these social justice issues, first-trimester prenatal screening should be publicly funded in countries such as the Netherlands, with universal coverage healthcare systems that offer all other antenatal care services and screening programmes free of charge. In this reply, we offer three additional reasons for public funding of NIPT. First, NIPT may not primarily have medical utility for women and children, but rather offers relevant information and reproductive options, and thus serves important autonomy interests of women. Second, public funding of NIPT can be justified because it results in a reduction of collectively borne costs associated with care and support for children with chromosomal abnormalities. It is important to note that this is not an argument for individual women to take part in screening or to terminate an affected pregnancy. However, it is a legitimate argument in policy making regarding funding arrangements for screening programmes. Finally, public funding would help to amend current misunderstandings among pregnant women (eg, that they are not at risk), and thus to support informed consent for first-trimester prenatal screening.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eline Maria Bunnik
- Medical Ethics, Philosophy and History of Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Adriana Kater-Kuipers
- Medical Ethics, Philosophy and History of Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Robert-Jan H Galjaard
- Clinical Genetics, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Inez de Beaufort
- Medical Ethics, Philosophy and History of Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Jansen CH, de Vries JM, Engels M, van de Kamp K, Snijders RJ, Martin L, Henneman L, Pajkrt E. Effect of education and attitude on health professionals' knowledge on prenatal screening. Eur J Midwifery 2020; 4:38. [PMID: 33537639 PMCID: PMC7839104 DOI: 10.18332/ejm/126626] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/25/2020] [Revised: 07/20/2020] [Accepted: 08/21/2020] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Ongoing developments in prenatal anomaly screening necessitate continuous updating of counsellors’ knowledge. We explored the effect of a refresher counselling course on participants’ knowledge of prenatal screening. METHODS We investigated the association between knowledge and counsellors’ working experience. Also, the association between knowledge and counsellors’ attitude towards prenatal screening was determined. All counsellors in the North-West region of the Netherlands were invited to attend a refresher counselling course and fill in both a pre-course and a post-course questionnaire. The participants consisted of midwifes, sonographers and gynaecologists. A 55-item questionnaire assessed pre-course (T0) and post-course (T1) knowledge. At T0, counsellors’ attitude towards the prenatal screening program was assessed and its association with knowledge analysed. RESULTS Of 387 counsellors, 68 (18%) attended the course and completed both questionnaires. Knowledge increased significantly from 77.7% to 84.6% (p<0.01). Scores were lowest regarding congenital heart diseases. Participants with ultrasound experience scored higher on T0, but improvement was seen in participants with and without ultrasound experience. Participants with a positive attitude towards a free-of-charge first trimester combined test had higher knowledge scores than participants with a negative attitude (62% vs 46%; p=0.002). CONCLUSIONS A refresher course improved counsellors’ knowledge on prenatal screening. Ultrasound experience and a positive attitude towards free screening may be associated with higher knowledge levels. Participating in a mandatory refresher counselling course is useful for the continuous improvement of healthcare practitioners’ knowledge. More research on the effect of knowledge and attitude on the quality of prenatal screening is necessary.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Charlotte H Jansen
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Amsterdam Reproduction and Development Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam,Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Jana M de Vries
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Amsterdam Reproduction and Development Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam,Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Melanie Engels
- EchoXpert, Prenatal Ultrasound and Training Center, Amsterdam,the Netherlands
| | - Karline van de Kamp
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Amsterdam Reproduction and Development Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam,Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Rosalinde J Snijders
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Amsterdam Reproduction and Development Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam,Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Linda Martin
- Midwifery Science, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Lidewij Henneman
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Amsterdam Reproduction and Development Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Eva Pajkrt
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Amsterdam Reproduction and Development Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam,Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Bunnik EM, Kater-Kuipers A, Galjaard RJH, de Beaufort ID. Should pregnant women be charged for non-invasive prenatal screening? Implications for reproductive autonomy and equal access. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS 2020; 46:194-198. [PMID: 31527142 PMCID: PMC7042959 DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2019-105675] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/03/2019] [Revised: 09/02/2019] [Accepted: 09/09/2019] [Indexed: 05/28/2023]
Abstract
The introduction of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) in healthcare systems around the world offers an opportunity to reconsider funding policies for prenatal screening. In some countries with universal access healthcare systems, pregnant women and their partners are asked to (co)pay for NIPT. In this paper, we discuss two important rationales for charging women for NIPT: (1) to prevent increased uptake of NIPT and (2) to promote informed choice. First, given the aim of prenatal screening (reproductive autonomy), high or low uptake rates are not intrinsically desirable or undesirable. Using funding policies to negatively affect uptake, however, is at odds with the aim of screening. Furthermore, copayment disproportionally affects those of lower socioeconomic status, which conflicts with justice requirements and impedes equal access to prenatal screening. Second, we argue that although payment models may influence pregnant women's choice behaviours and perceptions of the relevance of NIPT, the copayment requirement does not necessarily lead to better-informed choices. On the contrary, external (ie, financial) influences on women's personal choices for or against prenatal screening should ideally be avoided. To improve informed decision-making, healthcare systems should instead invest in adequate non-directive, value-focused pretest counselling. This paper concludes that requiring (substantial) copayments for NIPT in universal access healthcare systems fails to promote reproductive autonomy and is unfair.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eline M Bunnik
- Medical Ethics and Philosophy of Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Adriana Kater-Kuipers
- Medical Ethics and Philosophy of Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Robert-Jan H Galjaard
- Clinical Genetics, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Inez D de Beaufort
- Medical Ethics and Philosophy of Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Fleurke-Rozema H, van de Kamp K, Bakker M, Pajkrt E, Bilardo C, Snijders R. Prevalence, timing of diagnosis and pregnancy outcome of abdominal wall defects after the introduction of a national prenatal screening program. Prenat Diagn 2017; 37:383-388. [DOI: 10.1002/pd.5023] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/26/2016] [Revised: 01/30/2017] [Accepted: 02/03/2017] [Indexed: 01/18/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Hanneke Fleurke-Rozema
- Department of Obstetrics; University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen; Groningen The Netherlands
| | - Karline van de Kamp
- Department of Obstetrics; University Medical Centre Amsterdam; Amsterdam The Netherlands
| | - Marian Bakker
- Department of Obstetrics; University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen; Groningen The Netherlands
| | - Eva Pajkrt
- Department of Obstetrics; University Medical Centre Amsterdam; Amsterdam The Netherlands
| | - Caterina Bilardo
- Department of Obstetrics; University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen; Groningen The Netherlands
| | - Rosalinde Snijders
- Department of Obstetrics; University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen; Groningen The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Naqvi M, Goldfarb IT, Hanmer KJ, Bryant A. Chromosomal microarray use among women undergoing invasive prenatal diagnosis. Prenat Diagn 2016; 36:656-61. [DOI: 10.1002/pd.4835] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/09/2015] [Revised: 04/19/2016] [Accepted: 04/21/2016] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Mariam Naqvi
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine; Massachusetts General Hospital; Boston MA USA
| | - Ilona T. Goldfarb
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine; Massachusetts General Hospital; Boston MA USA
| | - Kaitlin J. Hanmer
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine; Massachusetts General Hospital; Boston MA USA
| | - Allison Bryant
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine; Massachusetts General Hospital; Boston MA USA
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Li C, Shi L, Huang J, Qian X, Chen Y. Factors associated with utilization of maternal serum screening for Down syndrome in mainland China: a cross-sectional study. BMC Health Serv Res 2016; 16:8. [PMID: 26762138 PMCID: PMC4712508 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-016-1260-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/22/2015] [Accepted: 01/07/2016] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Knowledge of the factors that influence maternal serum screening (MSS) service utilization can be used to develop health policies to promote equitable access to MSS and further diagnostic tests. The purpose of this study was to find the factors associated with utilization of MSS as well as the current status of service utilization in mainland China. METHODS This was a hospital-based cross-sectional study with respondents interviewed with a questionnaire designed based on Andersen's behavioral model. Descriptive statistics, univariate analysis, and multilevel logistic regression analysis were used to identify the factors associated with MSS utilization, and to explore potential methods to improve screening uptake. RESULTS A total of 8110 women who had given birth within the previous 7 days in one of 111 participating institutions from six provinces in mainland China were interviewed. Approximately 36% of the participants had used MSS. Women between 20 and 35 years, who resided in urban areas, were educated, were in a stable occupation, who had health knowledge, who attended maternal preparation classes, who had received eight or more prenatal checkups, who were from a region of higher social economic status, and who delivered in a tertiary healthcare institution were significantly more likely to use MSS than their counterparts. As compared with other factors, insufficient education is the single most important demographic factor for service underutilization. CONCLUSIONS Efforts should not only be made to target the population that underuses MSS, but the overall organization of MSS service delivery should be assessed during policy development to make access to MSS equitable to the entire population of mainland China.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chuanlin Li
- School of Public Health, Key Lab of Health Technology Assessment (Ministry of Health), Fudan University, No.138 Yixueyuan Rd, Post box No. 197, Shanghai, 200032, PRC.
| | - Leiyu Shi
- Primary Care Policy Center, Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA.
| | - Jiayan Huang
- School of Public Health, Key Lab of Health Technology Assessment (Ministry of Health), Fudan University, No.138 Yixueyuan Rd, Post box No. 197, Shanghai, 200032, PRC.
- Collaborative Innovation Center of Social Risks Governance in Health, Shanghai, 200032, PRC.
| | - Xu Qian
- School of Public Health, Key Lab of Health Technology Assessment (Ministry of Health), Fudan University, No.138 Yixueyuan Rd, Post box No. 197, Shanghai, 200032, PRC.
- Collaborative Innovation Center of Social Risks Governance in Health, Shanghai, 200032, PRC.
| | - Yingyao Chen
- School of Public Health, Key Lab of Health Technology Assessment (Ministry of Health), Fudan University, No.138 Yixueyuan Rd, Post box No. 197, Shanghai, 200032, PRC.
- Collaborative Innovation Center of Social Risks Governance in Health, Shanghai, 200032, PRC.
| |
Collapse
|