ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2017
Women's Experience with Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing and Emotional Well-being and Satisfaction after Test-Results.
Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 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
33 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 62 citations in OpenAlex.
- Health Literacy in Pregnant Women: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Pooled 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
- Exploring measurement tools used to assess knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of pregnant women toward prenatal screening: A systematic review.Women's health (London, England)Pooled it
- The effect of visual and verbal information during second-trimester ultrasound on state anxiety in pregnant women: a single-blind randomized controlled trial.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Trial
- Mobile App Use and Pregnancy Health Literacy: Cross-Sectional Study Using Bayesian Network Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Discomfort in the Unexpected: A Mixed-Methods Study on Australian Clinicians' Experiences of Explaining Prenatal Screening Results.The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology · 2026Article
- Navigating uncertainty during non-invasive prenatal testing: Genetic counselors' experiences of supporting autonomous reproductive decision-making.Journal of genetic counseling · 2026Article
- Antenatal Testing Education: Assessing Health Education and Health Knowledge in a High-Risk Pregnant Population.AJP reports · 2026Article
- "You think everything's fine and then it starts not being fine": a qualitative descriptive study exploring the prenatal testing experiences of Black women living in England.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
- Health Literacy in Pregnant Women and Its Associations with Personal, Socioeconomic, and Health-Related Factors in Primary Care.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2025Article
- Performance of Massive Parallel Sequencing-Based Cell-Free DNA Testing in Compromised Pregnancies.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Maternal Reassurance, Satisfaction, and Anxiety after First-Trimester Screening for Aneuploidies: Comparison between Contingent Screening and Universal Cell-Free DNA Testing.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Health literacy assessment and analysis of influencing factors in pregnant women with gestational diabetes mellitus in Southwest China.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing for "Non-Medical" Traits: Ensuring Consistency in Ethical Decision-Making.The American journal of bioethics : AJOB · 2023Article
- Predictor role of marital conflict on maternal competency with mediating role of perceived stress and concerns during pregnancy: A structural equation model.Neuropsychopharmacology reports · 2023Article
- Women's worries about prenatal screening tests suspected of fetal anomalies: a qualitative study.BMC women's health · 2023Article
- Decision-making process about prenatal genetic screening: how deeply do moms-to-be want to know from Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing?BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2023Article
- Patient experience with non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) as a primary screen for aneuploidy in the Netherlands.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2022Article
- Parental experiences of rapid exome sequencing in cases with major ultrasound anomalies during pregnancy.Prenatal diagnosis · 2022Article
- Gender Differences in Psychological Stress Factors of Physical Therapy Degree Students in the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cross-Sectional Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Increasingly, high-risk pregnant women opt for non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) instead of invasive diagnostic testing. Since NIPT is less accurate than invasive testing, a normal NIPT result might leave women less reassured. A questionnaire study was performed among pregnant women with elevated risk for fetal aneuploidy based on first-trimester combined test (risk ≥1:200) or medical history, who were offered NIPT in the nationwide Dutch TRIDENT study. Pre- and post-test questionnaires (n = 682) included measures on: experiences with NIPT procedure, feelings of reassurance, anxiety (State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, STAI), child-related anxiety (PRAQ-R), and satisfaction. The majority (96.1%) were glad to have been offered NIPT. Most (68.5%) perceived the waiting time for NIPT results (mean: 15 days, range 5-32) as (much) too long. Most women with a normal NIPT result felt reassured (80.9%) or somewhat reassured (15.7%). Levels of anxiety and child-related anxiety were significantly lower after receiving a normal NIPT result as compared to the moment of intake (p < 0.001). Women with inadequate health literacy or a medical history (e.g. previous child with trisomy) experienced significantly higher post-test-result anxiety (Mean (M) STAI = 31.6 and 30.0, respectively) compared to those with adequate health literacy (M = 28.6) and no medical history (M = 28.6), indicating these women might benefit from extra information and/or guidance when communicating NIPT test-results. Introducing NIPT as an alternative to invasive testing, led to an offer that satisfied and largely reassured high-risk pregnant women.
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.