Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36554285›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022

Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT) Implementation in Japan: A Comparison with the United Kingdom, Germany, Italy, Sweden, and Taiwan.

Mayo Takahashi, Le Khac Linh, Ahmad M Sayed, Atsuko Imoto, Miho Sato, Kadek Agus Surya Dila, Nguyen Tien Huy, Kazuhiko Moji

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

8 authors.

Mayo TakahashiSchool of Tropical Medicine and Global Health, Nagasaki University, Nagasaki 852-8523, Japan.
Le Khac LinhCollege of Health Sciences, VinUniversity, Hanoi 100000, Vietnam.
Ahmad M SayedDepartment of Organic Chemistry, College of Pharmacy, Al-Azhar University, Cairo 11651, Egypt.
Atsuko ImotoSchool of Tropical Medicine and Global Health, Nagasaki University, Nagasaki 852-8523, Japan.
Miho SatoSchool of Tropical Medicine and Global Health, Nagasaki University, Nagasaki 852-8523, Japan.
Kadek Agus Surya DilaGiri Emas Hospital, Singaraja City 81171, Buleleng, Bali, Indonesia.
Nguyen Tien HuySchool of Tropical Medicine and Global Health, Nagasaki University, Nagasaki 852-8523, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-9543-9440
Kazuhiko MojiSchool of Global Humanities and Social Sciences, Nagasaki University, Nagasaki 852-8523, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT) guideline was issued and applied in 2013 by the Japanese Medical Association. Since being issued, the NIPT practice in Japan still has some problems related to indication, access, cost coverage and uniformity. Therefore, our study aimed to identify the Japanese challenges of adopting NIPT into prenatal diagnosis by comparing the system and process with other countries.

methodThe United Kingdom, Germany, Italy, Sweden, and Taiwan were purposefully selected for comparison. All the countries, including Japan, introduced NIPT. The literature and information searches were conducted using PubMed, SCOPUS, Google Scholar, CiNii and Google searching engine.

resultsThe process of NIPT in Japan was very different from the other countries. Japan is the only country that indicated NIPT for only pregnant women over 35 years old in certificated facilities and did not have a policy regarding providing information on prenatal screening and NIPT to all women. Japan also did not have a policy regarding abortion due to fetal abnormalities. The practice of NIPT guidelines is different between non-certified and certified facilities. NIPT fee was the highest in Japan and was not covered by insurance.

conclusionPregnant women in Japan suffered from disparities in information access, economic burden, geographic location, and practice of NIPT guidelines between the certified and the non-certified facilities. Pregnant women-centered prenatal diagnosis policy, including NIPT, should be established in Japan by learning cases from other countries.

Indexed as

Prenatal CareAdultFemaleGermanyHumansItalyJapanPregnancySwedenTaiwanUnited KingdomNIPTperinatal careprenatal diagnosisprenatal screening

Identifiers

PMID36554285
PMCPMC9778094

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.