Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36481825›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2023

Experiences of pregnant women with genome-wide non-invasive prenatal testing in a national screening program.

Karuna R M van der Meij, Qiu Ying F van de Pol, Mireille N Bekker, Linda Martin, Janneke Gitsels-van der Wal, Elsbeth H van Vliet-Lachotzki, Janneke M Weiss, Robert-Jan H Galjaard, Erik A Sistermans, Merryn V E Macville and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Molecular explanations for variability of clinical phenotypes.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2023
    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

12 authors.

Karuna R M van der MeijDepartment of Human Genetics, Amsterdam UMC, location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. k.vandermeij@amsterdamumc.nl.ORCID 0000-0002-1801-588X
Qiu Ying F van de PolDepartment of Human Genetics, Amsterdam UMC, location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Mireille N BekkerDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Utrecht University Medical Center, Utrecht, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-7372-4291
Linda MartinDepartment of Midwifery Science, AVAG, Amsterdam UMC, location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-3041-6536
Janneke Gitsels-van der WalDepartment of Midwifery Science, AVAG, Amsterdam UMC, location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-5742-7246
Elsbeth H van Vliet-LachotzkiVSOP - Patient Alliance for Rare and Genetic Diseases, Soest, the Netherlands.
Janneke M WeissDepartment of Genetics, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-0936-1406
Robert-Jan H GaljaardDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-8101-6180
Erik A SistermansDepartment of Human Genetics, Amsterdam UMC, location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-7187-4563
Merryn V E MacvilleDepartment of Clinical Genetics, GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-1675-2234
Lidewij HennemanDepartment of Human Genetics, Amsterdam UMC, location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-3531-0597
Dutch NIPT Consortium

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pregnant women's perspectives should be included in the dialogue surrounding the expanding offers of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT), especially now that technological possibilities are rapidly increasing. This study evaluated women's experiences with the offer of genome-wide (GW) first-tier NIPT in a national screening program. A nationwide pre-and post-test questionnaire was completed by 473 pregnant women choosing between targeted NIPT (trisomies 21, 18 and 13 only) and GW-NIPT (also other findings) within the Dutch TRIDENT-2 study. Measures included satisfaction, reasons for or against choosing GW-NIPT, anxiety, and opinion on the future scope of NIPT. Most respondents (90.4%) were glad to have been offered the choice between GW-NIPT and targeted NIPT; 76.5% chose GW-NIPT. Main reasons to choose GW-NIPT were 'wanting as much information as possible regarding the child's health' (38.6%) and 'to be prepared for everything' (23.8%). Main reasons to choose targeted NIPT were 'avoiding uncertain results/outcomes' (33.7%) and 'not wanting to unnecessarily worry' (32.6%). Nearly all respondents received a low-risk NIPT result (98.7%). No differences were found in anxiety between women choosing GW-NIPT and targeted NIPT. Most respondents were favorable toward future prenatal screening for a range of conditions, including life-threatening disorders, mental disabilities, disorders treatable in pregnancy and severe physical disabilities, regardless of their choice for GW-NIPT or targeted NIPT. In conclusion, women who chose first-tier NIPT were satisfied with the choice between GW-NIPT and targeted NIPT, and most women were favorable toward a broader future screening offer. Our results contribute to the debate concerning the expansion of NIPT.

Indexed as

Down SyndromePregnant PeopleChildFemaleHumansPregnancyPrenatal DiagnosisSurveys and QuestionnairesUncertainty

Identifiers

PMID36481825
PMCPMC10172316

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.