ArticleAJOB empirical bioethics
"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.
Article in AJOB empirical bioethics. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Black parents' views and understanding of prenatal genetic testing: a cross-sectional survey of attitudes, knowledge and trust in UK healthcare.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- Are People From Black Communities Proportionately Represented in UK and US Studies Examining Views on Screening and Diagnostic Genetic Testing in Pregnancy? A Scoping Review.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2025Article
- Factors influencing pregnant women's decision to accept or decline prenatal screening and diagnosis - a qualitative study.Journal of community genetics · 2024Article
- Never "totally prepared": Support groups on helping families prepare for a child with a genetic condition.Journal of community genetics · 2023Article
- Patient perspectives on noninvasive prenatal testing among black women in the United States: a scoping review.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2023Article
- Resistance to Change.Reproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.) · 2023Review
- The Knowledge, Attitude, Practices, and Satisfaction of Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing among Chinese Pregnant Women under Different Payment Schemes: A Comparative Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- Decisional regret in women receiving high risk or inconclusive prenatal cell-free DNA screening results.The journal of maternal-fetal & neonatal medicine : the official journal of the European Association of Perinatal Medicine, the Federation of Asia and Oceania Perinatal Societies, the International Society of Perinatal Obstetricians · 2020Article
- Is preparation a good reason for prenatal genetic testing? Ethical and critical questions.Birth defects research · 2020Article
- 'Small cost to pay for peace of mind': Women's experiences with non-invasive prenatal testing.The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology · 2019Article
- Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices of Women Toward Prenatal Genetic Testing.Epigenetics insights · 2018Article
- Considering medical risk information and communicating values: A mixed-method study of women's choice in prenatal testing.PloS one · 2017Article
- Spanish- and English-Speaking Pregnant Women's Views on cfDNA and Other Prenatal Screening: Practical and Ethical Reflections.Journal of genetic counseling · 2016Article
- Old Questions, New Paradigms: Ethical, Legal, and Social Complications of Noninvasive Prenatal Testing.AJOB empirical bioethics · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe recent availability of new non-invasive prenatal genetic tests for fetal aneuploidy has raised questions concerning whether and how these new tests will be integrated into prenatal medical care. Among the many factors to be considered are public understandings and preferences about prenatal testing mechanisms and the prospect of fetal aneuploidy.
methodsTo address these issues, we conducted a nation-wide mixed-method survey of 2,960 adults in the United States to explore justifications for choices among prenatal testing mechanisms. Open responses were qualitatively coded and grouped by theme.
resultsRespondents cited accuracy, followed by cost, as the most significant aspects of prenatal testing. Acceptance of testing was predicated on differing valuations of knowledge and on personal and religious beliefs. Trust in the medical establishment, attitudes towards risk, and beliefs about health and illness were also considered relevant.
conclusionsAlthough a significant portion of the sample population valued the additional accuracy provided by the new non-invasive tests, they nevertheless expressed concerns over high costs. Furthermore, participants continued to express reservations about the value of prenatal genetic information per se, regardless of how it was obtained.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.