ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2020
The influence of experiential knowledge and societal perceptions on decision-making regarding non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT).
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Demographic Characteristics Associated With Perceptions of Personal Utility in Genetic and Genomic Testing: A Systematic Review.JAMA network open · 2023Pooled it
- The Function of Non-invasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT) Request Forms in the Australian Context.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2026Article
- Informal Prenatal Genetic Screening Education: What can you learn from Google and YouTube?Genetics in medicine open · 2024Article
- Performance Evaluation of Noninvasive Prenatal Testing in Screening Chromosome Disorders: A Single-Center Observational Study of 15,304 Consecutive Cases in China.International journal of women's health · 2024Article
- Advancements of non-invasive prenatal testing: the role of obstetricians.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Review
- Women's experiences with non-invasive prenatal testing in Switzerland: a qualitative analysis.BMC medical ethics · 2023Article
- Patient perspectives on noninvasive prenatal testing among black women in the United States: a scoping review.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2023Article
- 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
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNon-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) allows women to access genetic information about their fetuses without the physical risk inherent to prior testing methods. The advent of NIPT technology has led to concerns regarding the quality and process of informed consent, as a view of NIPT as "routine" could impair women's considered approach when choosing to undergo testing. Prior studies evaluating NIPT decision-making have focused on the clinical encounter as the primary environment for acquisition of biomedical information and decision formation. While important, this conceptualization fails to consider how additional sources of knowledge, including embodied and empathetic experiential knowledge, shape perceptions of risk and the societal use of NIPT.
methodsIn order to address this issue, qualitative, semi-structured interviews with 25 women who had been offered NIPT were performed. Participants came from a well-resourced, rural setting near a major academic medical center in the US. Women were categorized by NIPT use/non-use as well as whether their described decision-making process was perceived as making a significant decision requiring contemplation ("significant") versus a rapid or immediate decision ("routinized"). A constructivist general inductive approach was used to explore themes in the data, develop a framework of NIPT decision-making, and compare the perceptions of women with differential decision-making processes and outcomes.
resultsA framework for decision-making regarding NIPT was developed based on three emergent factors: perceptions of the societal use of NIPT, expected emotional impact of genetic information, and perceived utility of genetic information. Analysis revealed that perceptions of widespread use of NIPT, pervasive societal narratives of NIPT use as "forward-thinking," and a perception of information as anxiety-relieving contributed to routinized uptake of NIPT. In contrast, women who displayed a lack of routinization expressed fewer stereotypes regarding the audience for NIPT and relied on communication with their social networks to consider how they might use the information provided by NIPT.
conclusionsThe findings of this study reveal the societal narratives and perceptions that shape differential decision-making regarding NIPT in the U.S. CONTEXT: Understanding and addressing these perceptions that influence NIPT decision-making, especially routinized uptake of NIPT, is important as the use and scope of this technology increases.
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.