To assess attitudes toward DNA collection in an epidemiological study, focus groups were assembled in September 2007 with mothers who had participated in a case-control study of birth defects. Each recruited mother previously had completed an interview and had received a mailed kit containing cytobrushes to collect buccal cells for DNA from herself, her infant, and her infant's father during the period July 2004 through July 2007. A total of 38 mothers attended six focus groups comprising: (1) non-Hispanic Black mothers of case infants who participated or (2) did not participate in DNA collection, (3) mothers of any race or ethnicity who had case infants of low birth weight who participated or (4) did not participate in DNA collection, and (5) non-Hispanic Black mothers of control infants who participated or (6) did not participate in DNA collection. Moderator-led discussions probed maternal attitudes toward providing specimens, factors that influenced decision making, and collection method preferences. Biologics participants reported that they provided DNA for altruistic reasons. Biologics nonparticipants voiced concerns about government involvement and how their DNA will be used. Information provided (or not provided) on DNA use, storage, and disposal influenced decision making. Biologics participants and nonparticipants reported that paternal skepticism was a barrier to participation. All mothers were asked to rank DNA collection methods in terms of preference (cytobrushes, saliva, mouthwash, newborn blood spots, and blood collection). Preferred methods were convenient and noninvasive. Better understanding attitudes toward DNA collection and preferred collection methods might allow more inclusive participation and benefit future studies.

To understand motivations and barriers to participation in studies that include DNA collection, focus group discussions were held with mothers who had participated in a case-control study of birth defects. Recruited mothers had completed an interview and had received a mailed kit containing cytobrushes to collect buccal cells for DNA from herself, her infant, and her infant's father. Six moderator-led focus groups were attended by a total of 38 women residing in Atlanta, Georgia. Focus groups were segmented by DNA collection status (biologics participants or nonparticipants), infant case-control status, infant birthweight, and maternal race and ethnicity. This report assesses maternal attitudes toward study materials and communication strategies. Across groups, respondents expressed concern about how their contact information was obtained. Study materials were described as clear and professional by most women, although some respondents reported confusion about disclosure of individual genetic results. Respondents generally reported that monetary incentives were not a motivation to participate, but increased perceived study legitimacy. Biologics nonparticipants expressed concerns about kit component sterility; government involvement; and DNA sample use, storage, and disposal. Respondents suggested that investigators provide feedback on whether sample collection was performed correctly and provide materials targeted to fathers to help alleviate paternal skepticism. Participation in DNA collection might be improved by strengthening study materials and communication strategies.

BackgroundAn estimated 1 in 150 infants is born each year with congenital cytomegalovirus (CMV); nearly 1 in 750 suffers permanent disabilities. Congenital CMV is the result of a pregnant woman becoming infected with CMV. Educating pregnant women about CMV is currently the best approach to prevention. Limited research is available on how to effectively communicate with women about CMV. We conducted formative research on fear appeals theory-based messages about CMV and prevention with U.S. women. Fear appeal theories suggest that message recipients will take action if they feel fear.MethodsFirst, we conducted in-depth interviews (N = 32) with women who had young children who tested positive for CMV. Second, we conducted eight focus groups (N = 70) in two phases and two cities (Phase 2: Atlanta, GA; Phase 3: San Diego, CA) with pregnant women and non-pregnant women who had young children. Few participants knew about CMV before the focus groups.Participants reviewed and gave feedback on messages created around fear appeals theory-based communication concepts. The following concepts were tested in one or more of the three phases of research: CMV is severe, CMV is common, CMV is preventable, CMV preventive strategies are similar to other behavior changes women make during pregnancy, CMV preventive strategies can be incorporated in moderation to reduce exposure, and CMV is severe but preventable.ResultsParticipants recommended communicating that CMV is common by using prevalence ratios (e.g., 1 in 150) or comparing CMV to other well-known disabilities. To convey the severity of CMV, participants preferred stories about CMV along with prevention strategies. Participants also welcomed prevention strategies when it included a message about risk reduction. In general, participants said messages were motivating, even if they felt that it could be difficult to make certain behavior changes.ConclusionsFindings from this research can contribute to future efforts to educate pregnant women about CMV, especially regarding use of fear appeals-based messages. Pregnant women may face certain challenges to practicing prevention strategies but, overall, are motivated make changes to increase their chances of having a healthy baby.