Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34220958›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in genetics2021

Non-invasive Prenatal Testing, What Patients Do Not Learn, May Be Due to Lack of Specialist Genetic Training by Gynecologists and Obstetricians?

Thomas Liehr

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in genetics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
11.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trust As the Foundation for Informed Decision-Making in Prenatal Genetic Screening and Diagnostic Testing: A Qualitative Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing in Germany.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Medizinische Genetik : Mitteilungsblatt des Berufsverbandes Medizinische Genetik e.V · 2022
    Article
  12. Medizinische Genetik : Mitteilungsblatt des Berufsverbandes Medizinische Genetik e.V · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Case Report: Prenatal Identification of aFrontiers in genetics · 2022
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Thomas LiehrInstitute of Human Genetics, Jena University Hospital, Friedrich Schiller University Jena, Jena, Germany.
Jena University Hospital · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Platforms for "non-invasive prenatal testing" (NIPT), or also referred to as "non-invasive prenatal screening" (NIPS) have been available for over 10 years, and are the most recent tools available to obtain information about genetic condition(s) of an unborn child. The highly praised advantage of NIPT-screening is that results can provide early hints on the detection of fetal trisomies and gonosomal numerical aberrations as early as the 10th week of gestation onward, without any need for invasive procedures, such as amniocenteses or alternatives. Understandably, the public along with gynecologists and obstetricians eagerly await these early test results. Their general hope for normal (=negative) test results is also justified, as in >95% of the tested cases such an outcome is to be expected. However, pregnant women can be disappointed and confused, particularly regarding the genetic information and proposed care when the results are positive, and these emotions are also common with false-positive and false-negative NIPT results. Finally, such concerns in understanding the advantages and limitations of this routinely ordered screening tool end up at Clinical Geneticists and Genetic counselors. In this review, general background on NIPT, differences of NIPT platforms, advantages and limitations of NIPT, as well as consequences of insufficient counseling before and after NIPT are summarized. To provide comprehensive care in all pregnancies situations, professionals need a careful attitude toward offering NIPT along with specially training and qualifications in counseling for these procedures. Often it is gynecologists and obstetricians who discuss the use of NIPT with patients; however, although these physicians have a highly qualified background and knowledge in their respective specialty area(s), they may lack specific training on the interpretation of NIPT-screening results. These potential knowledge gaps must be closed quickly and comprehensively by the corresponding scientific societies to ensure optimal patient care.

Indexed as

background knowledgecell-free placental DNAmassively parallel sequencingNIPT-short-cutsnon-invasive prenatal testingqualified genetic counselingsingle nucleotide polymorphism whole genomic sequencing

Identifiers

PMID34220958
PMCPMC8248176
OpenAlexW3174055630

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.