Search

Background: Physiological changes in pregnancy may affect drug safety and efficacy, sometimes requiring dose adjustments. Pregnancy-adjusted doses, however, are missing for most medications. Increasingly, pharmacokinetic models can be used for antenatal dose finding. Given the novelty of this technique and questions regarding dose credibility, the acceptability of model-informed antenatal doses should be explored.Objective: We aimed to assess the willingness-to-use and preferred features for model-informed antenatal doses among healthcare practitioners (HCPs) and pregnant women in European countries.Methods: A cross-sectional, web-based study drawing on two open surveys was performed between 8 September and 30 November 2022. Each survey comprised statements drawn from prior focus groups, associated with Likert-scales. Themes included respondents’ information needs, search behaviours along with their willingness-to-use and preferred features for model-informed antenatal doses. The surveys were disseminated through professional societies, pregnancy websites and social media. A descriptive analysis was performed.Results: In total, 608 HCPs from different specialties and 794 pregnant women across 15 countries participated, with 81% of respondents across both groups in the Netherlands or Belgium. Among pregnant women, 31% were medical professionals and 85% used medication during pregnancy. Eighty-three percent of HCPs found current antenatal pharmacotherapy suboptimal and 97% believed that model-informed antenatal doses would enhance the quality of antenatal care. Most HCPs (93%) and pregnant women (75%) would be willing to follow model-informed antenatal doses. Most HCPs desired access to the evidence (88%), including from pharmacokinetic modelling (62%). Most pregnant women (96%) wanted to understand antenatal dosing rationales and to be involved in dosing decisions (97%).Conclusion: The willingness-to-use model-informed antenatal doses is high among HCPs and pregnant women provided that certain information needs are met.

Introduction Neuroticism has societal, mental and physical health relevance, with an etiology involving genetic predisposition, psychological influence, and their interaction. Objectives To understand whether the association between polygenic risk score for neuroticism (PRS-N) and neuroticism is moderated by affective well-being. Methods Data were derived from TwinssCan, a general population twin cohort (age range=15-35 years, 478 monozygotic twins). Self-report questionnaires were used to measure well-being and neuroticism. PRS-N was trained from the Genetics of Personality Consortium (GPC) and United Kingdom Biobank (UKB). Multilevel mixed-effects models were used to test baseline and changes in well-being and neuroticism. Results Baseline wellbeing and neuroticism were associated (β=-1.35, p