ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2020
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.
Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Towards a Responsible Implementation of NIPT as a First-Tier Test in Canada: Decision-Makers' Perspectives.Prenatal diagnosis · 2025Article
- Ethical Challenges in Information Disclosure and Decision-making in Prenatal Testing: A Focus Group Study of Chinese Health Professionals in Maternal and Child Health Services.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2025Article
- Blazing the Trail of Non-Invasive Prenatal Screening Expanded Use: Healthcare Providers' Perspectives.Prenatal diagnosis · 2025Article
- Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing for "Non-Medical" Traits: Ensuring Consistency in Ethical Decision-Making.The American journal of bioethics : AJOB · 2023Article
- Negotiating Awareness: Dutch Midwives' Experiences of Noninvasive Prenatal Screening Counseling.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Patient experience with non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) as a primary screen for aneuploidy in the Netherlands.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2022Article
- Routinization of prenatal screening with the non-invasive prenatal test: pregnant women's perspectives.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2022Article
- Non-invasive prenatal test uptake in socioeconomically disadvantaged neighborhoods.Prenatal diagnosis · 2021Article
- Access to Prenatal Testing and Ethically Informed Counselling in Germany, Poland and Russia.Journal of personalized medicine · 2021Article
- 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
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The noninvasive prenatal test (NIPT) as the first trimester prenatal screening (FTS) for trisomies 21, 18, and 13 is offered to all pregnant women in the Netherlands. NIPT using genome sequencing allows for an expansion of the scope of FTS and the introduction of NIPT gives rise to ethical and societal concerns about deliberated decision-making, pressure to engage in screening, and possible lack of equal access due to the financial contribution (€175) to NIPT. We explored the opinions and experiences of pregnant women, who were offered FTS, about these concerns, and the possibility of a broadened scope. Nineteen pregnant women representing a diversity of backgrounds were interviewed using a semi-structured interview guide. Eight women did not opt for prenatal screening while 11 did (NIPT = 4, combined test = 7). Women experienced a free choice to accept or decline prenatal screening, despite sometimes receiving advice from others. Prior to pretest counseling, some women had already deliberated about what an abnormal test result would mean to them. Others accepted or declined FTS without deliberation. The current Dutch policy of requiring a co-payment was acceptable to some, who believed that it functioned as a threshold to think carefully about FTS. Others were concerned that a financial threshold would lead to unequal access to screening. Finally, pregnant women found it difficult to formulate opinions on the scope of FTS, because of lack of knowledge. Life expectancy, severity, and treatability were considered important criteria for the inclusion of a condition in NIPT.
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.