ReviewCureus2024
Factors Influencing the Decision-Making Process for Undergoing Invasive Prenatal Testing.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnostic evaluation and clinical utility of C-MoKa for prenatal genetic testing.Journal of translational medicine · 2026Article
- Preferences for Prenatal Care Among Pregnant Women: A Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiment Studies.International journal of women's health · 2026Review
- Healthcare professionals' perspectives on supporting individuals with NF1 during pregnancy and decision-making processes.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Article
- Transcervical, Transabdominal and Transvaginal Chorionic Villus Sampling for Prenatal Diagnosis in Zagreb, Croatia: A Prospective Single-Operator Study on 5500 Cases.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Applying theories, models, and frameworks to help genetic counselors and students achieve clinical and professional goals.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Article
- Assessment of decision-making autonomy in chronic pain patients: a pilot study.BMC medical ethics · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Invasive prenatal testing, amniocentesis, and chorionic villus sampling offer insights into fetal genetic integrity and health, but carry inevitable minor risks of miscarriage and infection, thus complicating the decision-making process for parents. Previous research has revealed several factors that influence the decision to undergo invasive prenatal testing, including demographic, clinical, and psychological aspects, and attitudes towards testing. Informed choice, involving understanding options and aligning them with personal values, is crucial, with healthcare providers playing a key role in offering unbiased information. This systematic review aims to gather and synthesize literature data on the above factors to draw conclusions to aid antenatal care providers in supporting couples to make more informed decisions about their prenatal care. A systematic search was performed in PubMed and PsycInfo databases using the appropriate keywords and an in-depth evaluation of the studies retrieved followed. Finally, 17 articles were eligible for our review investigating the decision-making process of invasive prenatal testing. Factors like maternal age, education, and ethnicity are pivotal during the decision-making process. Clinical characteristics also influence decisions and women with pregnancies categorized as high-risk or those who have undergone fertility treatment display a preference for invasive testing. There seems to be a direct correlation between a woman's willingness to consider pregnancy termination, deeply rooted in psychological and moral stances, and the inclination to undergo invasive testing. In the patient decision-making process, the provision and depth of knowledge are of paramount importance. A comprehensive understanding facilitates more informed decisions. Finally, attitudes towards termination of pregnancy, as another factor influencing the decision-making process, reveal a nuanced landscape where personal beliefs, religious considerations, legal restrictions, and perspectives on disability converge. Within this complex context, religion emerges as an important determinant, shaping individuals' views on the morality of abortion. This review sheds light on the most important factors influencing the couples' consent for invasive prenatal testing. Healthcare professionals must identify which factors are critical in every specific case among several sociodemographic, clinical, emotional, and religious factors. Thus, they will be able to provide balanced and comprehensive information to help couples under this stressful procedure. We advocate for a patient-centered multidisciplinary approach while navigating couples through the intricate landscape of decision-making concerning invasive prenatal testing.
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.