ArticlePloS one2016
Women's Experiences and Preferences for Service Delivery of Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing for Aneuploidy in a Public Health Setting: A Mixed Methods Study.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
40 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Healthcare professionals' perspectives on and experiences with non-invasive prenatal testing: a systematic review.Human genetics · 2025Pooled it
- Facilitating informed choice about non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT): a systematic review and qualitative meta-synthesis of women's experiences.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2019Pooled it
- Perspectives of Pregnant People and Clinicians on Noninvasive Prenatal Testing: A Systematic Review and Qualitative Meta-synthesis.Ontario health technology assessment series · 2019Pooled it
- Validation of PREM-PS, a patient-reported experience instrument, in a randomized controlled trial of pregnant women undergoing prenatal screening.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2026Trial
- Navigating uncertainty during non-invasive prenatal testing: Genetic counselors' experiences of supporting autonomous reproductive decision-making.Journal of genetic counseling · 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
- Article
- Decision-making for termination of pregnancy following non-invasive prenatal testing: a qualitative exploration of french, english and German healthcare professionals' perceptions and concerns.Reproductive health · 2025Article
- Women's preferences for NIPT as a first-line test in England and France: Challenges for genetic counseling practices.Journal of genetic counseling · 2024Article
- Factors influencing pregnant women's decision to accept or decline prenatal screening and diagnosis - a qualitative study.Journal of community genetics · 2024Article
- Disparities in integrating non-invasive prenatal testing into antenatal healthcare in Australia: a survey of healthcare professionals.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Article
- Women's experiences with non-invasive prenatal testing in Switzerland: a qualitative analysis.BMC medical ethics · 2023Article
- Noninvasive prenatal screening (NIPS) results for participants of the eXtraordinarY babies study: Screening, counseling, diagnosis, and discordance.Journal of genetic counseling · 2023Article
- Patient attitudes and preferences about expanded noninvasive prenatal testing.Frontiers in genetics · 2023Article
- Women's Concerns and Experiences of Fetal Anomaly Screening Process: A Qualitative Study.International journal of community based nursing and midwifery · 2023Article
- Patient experience with non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) as a primary screen for aneuploidy in the Netherlands.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2022Article
- How do women want to receive information about non-invasive prenatal testing? Evidence from a discrete choice experiment.Prenatal diagnosis · 2022Article
- Informed choice of pregnant women regarding noninvasive prenatal testing in Korea: a cross-sectional study.Korean journal of women health nursing · 2022Article
- False-positives and false-negatives in non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT): what can we learn from a meta-analyses on > 750,000 tests?Molecular cytogenetics · 2022Article
- Review
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
Abstract
Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for aneuploidy is currently only available in the UK through the private sector outside of the research arena. As part of an implementation study in the UK National Health Service we conducted a mixed methods study to assess women's experience of being offered NIPT using validated measures of decisional conflict, decisional regret and anxiety. Clinical service preferences were also explored. Women with a Down syndrome screening risk >1:1000 were invited to take part in the study and offered NIPT, NIPT and invasive testing (for women with a risk above 1:150) or no further testing. A cross-sectional survey and semi-structured interviews were conducted at two time points; at the time of testing and one month following receipt of results (or equivalent for NIPT decliners). In total, 845 questionnaires and 81 interviews were analysed. The main motivation to accept NIPT was for reassurance (30.8%). Decisional conflict occurred in a minimal number of cases (3.8%), however, none of the participants experienced decisional regret. Around a third (29.9%) of women had elevated anxiety at the time of testing, including intermediate risk women who traditionally would not be offered further testing (54.4% high risk; 20.1% medium risk), a finding supported through the qualitative interviews where prolonged or additional anxiety was found to occur in some medium risk cases. Women were overwhelmingly positive about the opportunity to have a test that was procedurally safe, accurate, reduced the need for invasive testing and identified cases of Down syndrome that might otherwise have been missed. Reassurance was identified as the main motivator for accepting NIPT, particularly amongst medium risk women, with high risk women inclined to accept NIPT to inform decisions around invasive testing. The current turnaround time for test result was identified as a key limitation. All the women interviewed thought NIPT should be adopted as part of NHS clinical practice, with the majority favouring NIPT offered as a first-line test. Our study highlights the potential that NIPT has to positively impact women's experience of prenatal testing for aneuploidy.
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.