ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2014
NIPT in a clinical setting: an analysis of uptake in the first months of clinical availability.
Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Genomics-based non-invasive prenatal testing for detection of fetal chromosomal aneuploidy in pregnant women.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Understanding knowledge, perception, and willingness of non-invasive prenatal testing for fetal aneuploidy: a survey among Chinese high-risk pregnant women.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- Implementing non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) in the Netherlands: An interview study exploring opinions about and experiences with societal pressure, reimbursement, and an expanding scope.Journal of genetic counseling · 2020Article
- Women's Experience with Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing and Emotional Well-being and Satisfaction after Test-Results.Journal of genetic counseling · 2017Article
- Sociodemographic and attitudinal predictors of simultaneous and redundant multiple marker and cell-free DNA screening among women aged ⩾35 years.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2017Article
- Genetic Counseling for Couples Seeking Noninvasive Prenatal Testing in Japan: Experiences of Pregnant Women and their Partners.Journal of genetic counseling · 2017Article
- Trial by Dutch laboratories for evaluation of non-invasive prenatal testing. Part I-clinical impact.Prenatal diagnosis · 2016Article
- Trial by Dutch laboratories for evaluation of non-invasive prenatal testing. Part II-women's perspectives.Prenatal diagnosis · 2016Article
- Spanish- and English-Speaking Pregnant Women's Views on cfDNA and Other Prenatal Screening: Practical and Ethical Reflections.Journal of genetic counseling · 2016Article
- Cell-Free DNA Screening: Complexities and Challenges of Clinical Implementation.Obstetrical & gynecological survey · 2016Review
- Article
- Knowledge and future preference of Chinese women in a major public hospital in Hong Kong after undergoing non-invasive prenatal testing for positive aneuploidy screening: a questionnaire survey.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2015Article
- Non-invasive prenatal testing: UK genetic counselors' experiences and perspectives.Journal of genetic counseling · 2015Article
- Genetic counselors' experience with cell-free fetal DNA testing as a prenatal screening option for aneuploidy.Journal of genetic counseling · 2014Article
- A new model for providing cell-free DNA and risk assessment for chromosome abnormalities in a public hospital setting.Journal of pregnancy · 2014Article
- Fetal gender and several cytokines are associated with the number of fetal cells in maternal blood--an observational study.PloS one · 2014Observational
- "Don't Want No Risk and Don't Want No Problems": Public Understandings of the Risks and Benefits of Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing in the United States.AJOB empirical bioethicsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of our study was to describe the clinical experience in offering noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for aneuploidy to pregnant patients, highlighting the clinical utility, barriers to acceptance and limitations of this novel test. Data were collected from 961 patients offered NIPT from 3/1/12 to 9/30/12. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed. Twenty-eight percent of patients elected NIPT and 72 % declined. Women continue to elect less sensitive and less specific screening through biochemical markers and nuchal translucency. Women considering all options at average risk for aneuploidy were less likely to accept NIPT testing than women who had a risk adjustment from an ultrasound marker or routine screening test. In our multi-ethnic population, Filipina women were significantly less likely to elect NIPT compared to other ethnicities. Five percent of NIPT ordered failed analysis. Several chromosome abnormalities were detected through CVS or amniocentesis that would not have been detected by NIPT. Even though NIPT offers a non-invasive, highly sensitive and specific analysis for aneuploidy, the majority of women in our study declined this option. NIPT should be offered in the context of genetic counseling so that women understand the limitations of the testing and make an educated decision about the testing option best suited to their situation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23723049What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.