ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2026
Navigating uncertainty during non-invasive prenatal testing: Genetic counselors' experiences of supporting autonomous reproductive decision-making.
Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There is limited understanding of how healthcare professionals understand and apply the concept of reproductive autonomy in their clinical practice with non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT). Existing research indicates potential misalignment between theoretical understandings of reproductive autonomy and its operationalization by healthcare professionals in clinical practice. Despite genetic counselors (GCs) having unique expertise and experience in prenatal genetic counseling, there is a dearth of research regarding their understanding and practices relating to reproductive autonomy. To address this gap, we explored GCs' NIPT clinical practice, particularly focusing on their conceptualization and facilitation of autonomous reproductive decision-making. Semi-structured interviews were undertaken with 23 GCs experienced in providing NIPT in Australia. Data were analyzed using inductive content analysis. GCs viewed their role as facilitating reproductive genetics decision-making and supporting patients to navigate the uncertainty inherent to prenatal screening, including phenotypic uncertainty. Uncertainty was viewed by GCs as an inherent feature of prenatal genetic testing, but not one that was incompatible with reproductive autonomy. Diverse views were expressed regarding the scope of conditions available via NIPT. Cost was viewed as a source of inequity, with all GCs supporting some level of public funding for 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.