Parents of Children with Newly Diagnosed Disorders of Sex Development Identify Major Concerns: A Qualitative Study

Qualitative research in pediatric urology

INTRODUCTION

Qualitative studies have become increasingly common in the pediatric urology literature due to their ability to enhance our understanding of physicians' and patients' preferences, attitudes, and beliefs. The pediatric urology literature currently lacks clear guidelines for reporting qualitative research. In their absence, it is challenging to judge the quality of these studies.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this educational article are to define what is involved in rigorous qualitative research studies, help readers recognize high-quality qualitative research, and provide practical skills in designing and implementing qualitative research.

RESULTS

Acknowledging researcher biases, taking steps to reduce bias and increase reflexivity, and clear descriptions of research and data collection methods all contribute increased rigor and trustworthiness of qualitative studies. Proper selection of qualitative methodology, derived from the research question to be answered, establishes a foundation for reliable and meaningful data.

CONCLUSION

As the field continues to grow, the standardization of reporting of these essential parameters becomes paramount so readers can gauge how findings can be appropriately applied to clinical practice.

Prenatal Detection and Evaluation of Differences of Sex Development: A Qualitative Interview Study of Parental Perspectives and Unmet Needs

Objectives

Prenatal diagnoses of differences of sex development (DSD) are increasing due to availability of cell‐free DNA screening (cell‐free DNA screening (cfDNA)). This study explores first‐hand experiences of parents whose children had prenatal findings of DSD.

Methods

Eligible parents were identified through chart review at a pediatric center and interviewed about their prenatal evaluation, decision making, informational sources, and support systems. Interviews were coded using a combined inductive and deductive thematic analysis. Parents also completed quantitative measures of decisional regret.

Results

Seventeen parents (13 mothers; 4 fathers) of 13 children (with 7 DSD diagnoses) were recruited. Four children had discordance between sex predicted by cfDNA versus prenatal ultrasound, and 2 had non‐binary appearing (atypical) genitalia on prenatal ultrasound. Of these 6, 3 were not offered additional prenatal testing or counseling.

Most parents described tension between obtaining support through disclosure of their child's diagnosis and preserving their child's autonomy/privacy, highlighting the need for mental health support.

Conclusion

This is the first study to gather qualitative data from parents whose children had prenatal findings of DSD. We identified multiple targets for intervention to improve care for patients with DSD across the lifespan, including improvements in clinician education, pre‐ and post‐test counseling, and patient education materials.

What's already known about this topic? What does this study add?

Prenatal detection of potential differences of sex development (DSD) is increasing as the availability of non‐invasive prenatal screening increases.

Algorithms have been developed for the diagnostic evaluation, but little is known about the psychosocial implications of that process.

This study focuses on the first‐hand experiences of families whose children had prenatal findings of a potential DSD, to identify existing sources of support and information, and areas for future improvement.