Non-rare thrombophilia (NRT) are hereditary predispositions to thromboembolism, the most severe side effect of combined hormonal contraception. In the mid-1990s, the identification of NRT stirred up a controversy over the possibility of investigating these genetic variants in women wishing to use contraception. Through a review of literature, this article reconstructs the debate over whether and how this genetic test should be prescribed as a way to reconfigure the risk visibility on pharmacological contraception. The main arguments identified concern the epidemiological, social, economic and clinical aspects of the test. In a context where the overall thrombotic risk for hormonal contraception is largely invisible, the genetic tests turn to embody the thrombotic risk itself. Those who opt for selective screening argue that a better estimation of risk implies a test prescription embed in a global medical assessment of women's individual risk. To advocates of universal or ‘extended’ screening, the tests are valuable tools to inform women on the thrombotic risk and, as such, appraised as a moral/legal obligation, whatever their predictive power. Risk visibility thus appears as an insightful concept to analyse a complex setting associating clinical, political, social and cultural considerations that touches upon medical power, women's responsibility and drug safety.

中文翻译：

---

评估筛查，使风险可见/可见。开药前关于非罕见血栓形成 (NRT) 检测的医学争论

非罕见血栓形成倾向 (NRT) 是血栓栓塞的遗传易感性，这是联合激素避孕的最严重副作用。在 1990 年代中期，NRT 的鉴定引发了关于在希望使用避孕措施的女性中研究这些遗传变异的可能性的争议。通过对文献的回顾，本文重新构建了关于是否以及如何将这种基因检测作为重新配置药物避孕风险可见性的一种方式的争论。确定的主要论点涉及检测的流行病学、社会、经济和临床方面。在激素避孕的整体血栓形成风险基本上不可见的情况下，基因检测转而体现血栓形成风险本身。那些选择选择性筛查的人认为，更好地评估风险意味着将测试处方嵌入女性个人风险的全球医学评估中。对于普遍或“扩展”筛查的倡导者而言，这些测试是告知女性血栓风险的宝贵工具，因此，无论其预测能力如何，都被视为道德/法律义务。因此，风险可见性似乎是一个富有洞察力的概念，用于分析与临床、政治、社会和文化考虑相关的复杂环境，涉及医疗权力、妇女责任和药物安全。被评估为道德/法律义务，无论其预测能力如何。因此，风险可见性似乎是一个富有洞察力的概念，用于分析与临床、政治、社会和文化考虑相关的复杂环境，涉及医疗权力、妇女责任和药物安全。被评估为道德/法律义务，无论其预测能力如何。因此，风险可见性似乎是一个富有洞察力的概念，用于分析与临床、政治、社会和文化考虑相关的复杂环境，涉及医疗权力、妇女责任和药物安全。