ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2016
Attitudes of women of advanced maternal age undergoing invasive prenatal diagnosis and the impact of genetic counselling.
Article in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Utilisation of Genetic Counselling Services Amongst Prenatal Healthcare Providers in Gauteng, South Africa.Prenatal diagnosis · 2026Article
- Article
- Prenatal Diagnosis Nomograms: A Novel Tool to Predict Fetal Chromosomal Abnormalities in High-Risk Patients.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2021Article
- Clinical features and pregnancy outcomes of women with abnormal cell-free fetal DNA test results.Annals of translational medicine · 2019Article
- The assessment of combined karyotype analysis and chromosomal microarray in pregnant women of advanced maternal age: a multicenter study.Annals of translational medicine · 2019Article
- A survey on awareness of genetic counseling for non-invasive prenatal testing: the first year experience in Japan.Journal of human genetics · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite the increasing availability and effectiveness of non-invasive screening for foetal aneuploidies, most women of advanced maternal age (AMA) still opt for invasive tests. A retrospective cross-sectional survey was performed on women of AMA undergoing prenatal invasive procedures, in order to explore their motivations and the outcome of preliminary genetic counselling according to the approach (individual or group) adopted. Of 687 eligible women, 221 (32.2%) participated: 117 had received individual counselling, while 104 had attended group sessions. The two groups did not differ by socio-demographic features. The commonest reported reason to undergo invasive tests was AMA itself (67.4%), while only 10.4% of women mentioned the opportunity of making informed choices. The majority perceived as clear and helpful the information received at counselling, and only 12.7% had doubts left that, however, often concerned non-pertinent issues. The impact of counselling on risk perception and decisions was limited: a minority stated their perceived risk of foetal abnormalities had either increased (6.8%) or reduced (3.6%), and only one eventually declined invasive test. The 52.6% of women expressed a preference toward individual counselling, which also had a stronger impact on perceived risk reduction (P=0.003). Nevertheless, group counselling had a more favourable impact on both clarity of understanding and helpfulness (P=0.0497 and P=0.035, respectively). The idea that AMA represents an absolute indication for invasive tests appears deeply rooted; promotion of non-invasive techniques may require extensive educational efforts targeted to both the general population and health professionals.
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.