ArticleFrontiers in medicine2023
Understanding knowledge, perception, and willingness of non-invasive prenatal testing for fetal aneuploidy: a survey among Chinese high-risk pregnant women.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Karyotyping with amniotic fluid in 6,572 pregnant women and pregnancy outcomes--A single-center retrospective study.PloS one · 2025Article
- Retrospective analysis of non-invasive prenatal testing: a population study involving 19,835 participants in the Shaoyang area.Frontiers in genetics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) is utilized for screening the likelihood of fetal aneuploidy, presenting the benefits of non-invasiveness, high sensitivity, and specificity. Its application in prenatal screening has become ubiquitous. The inquiry into how pregnant women comprehend and determine NIPT screening strategies is paramount. Regrettably, there has been a dearth of research on this subject in China. Consequently, this study scrutinizes pregnant women's cognizance and perspectives concerning NIPT, furnishing a foundation for advancing its judicious implementation. Methods: From February 2021 to December 2022, a questionnaire survey was conducted among pregnant women receiving prenatal care and screening at the Women's Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, who were randomly selected from a pool of individuals exhibiting a high risk of fetal aneuploidy on serological screening. The survey aimed to gather data on participant characteristics, knowledge, perception, and willingness concerning NIPT. The study employed chi-square and Kruskal Wallis tests to analyze subgroup differences. Results: A total of 226 valid questionnaires were obtained. 83.2% of women pregnant women identified as high risk by serological screening would opt for NIPT, with 66.4% indicating that they would prefer NIPT for fetal aneuploidy screening in future pregnancies. These findings suggest a notable willingness among pregnant women to undergo NIPT. Additionally, the results suggest that various factors, including place of residence, educational level, family income, causes of abortion, and conception method, influence pregnant women's knowledge about NIPT Accordingly, the level of NIPT knowledge varies among pregnant women. Conclusion: The survey generally revealed that pregnant women were strongly inclined to select NIPT; however, expectant Chinese mothers possess limited knowledge and perception regarding this screening method for fetal aneuploidy. Therefore, the government must implement effective measures to augment public awareness of fetal aneuploidy screening and encourage the judicious utilization of 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.