Literature DB >> 22028097

Noninvasive prenatal diagnosis: pregnant women's interest and expected uptake.

Reana Tischler1, Louanne Hudgins, Yair J Blumenfeld, Henry T Greely, Kelly E Ormond.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate pregnant women's level of future interest in noninvasive prenatal diagnosis (NIPD) and what factors might affect expected uptake of this testing.
METHOD: Written questionnaires were administered to women in their third trimester.
RESULTS: One hundred fourteen women returned the questionnaire (80.9% response rate). Of these, 71.9% reported interest in NIPD, 22.7% were ambivalent, and 5.4% were uninterested. Safety of the fetus was the single most important factor in 75% of women's decisions. Factors associated with increased interest in NIPD included: older age (p = 0.036), higher education (p = 0.013), Caucasian or Asian ethnicity (p = 0.011), and higher likelihood to terminate an affected pregnancy (p = 0.002). Nearly 20% of women reported that they would do whatever their doctor recommended regarding NIPD, and 94.4% of women wished to meet with a genetic counselor at some point to discuss NIPD.
CONCLUSION: The majority of pregnant women report hypothetical interest in NIPD, primarily because of increased safety for the fetus, although a significant minority are uninterested or ambivalent. Discussions with healthcare providers regarding NIPD, and their recommendations, are likely to be an important factor in women's decisions about this testing. As such, adequate discussion of the implications of prenatal diagnostic testing will be critical.
Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22028097      PMCID: PMC3225485          DOI: 10.1002/pd.2888

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prenat Diagn        ISSN: 0197-3851            Impact factor:   3.050


  38 in total

1.  Presence of fetal DNA in maternal plasma and serum.

Authors:  Y M Lo; N Corbetta; P F Chamberlain; V Rai; I L Sargent; C W Redman; J S Wainscoat
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1997-08-16       Impact factor: 79.321

2.  Psychosocial correlates of pregnant women's attitudes toward prenatal maternal serum screening and invasive diagnostic testing: beyond traditional risk status.

Authors:  Mark A Lumley; Suzanne T Zamerowski; Laird Jackson; Kimberly Dukes; Lisa Sullivan
Journal:  Genet Test       Date:  2006

3.  Racial-ethnic differences in genetic amniocentesis uptake.

Authors:  Jennifer B Saucier; Dennis Johnston; Catherine A Wicklund; Patricia Robbins-Furman; Jacqueline T Hecht; Manju Monga
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 2.537

4.  Factors affecting women's preference for type of prenatal screening test for chromosomal anomalies.

Authors:  K Spencer; D Aitken
Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 7.299

5.  Racial-ethnic differences in prenatal diagnostic test use and outcomes: preferences, socioeconomics, or patient knowledge?

Authors:  M Kuppermann; E Gates; A E Washington
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1996-05       Impact factor: 7.661

6.  The influence of risk estimates obtained from maternal serum screening on amniocentesis rates.

Authors:  V M Mueller; T Huang; A M Summers; S H M Winsor
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 3.050

7.  Are pregnant women making informed choices about prenatal screening?

Authors:  Matthijs van den Berg; Danielle R M Timmermans; Leo P Ten Kate; John M G van Vugt; Gerrit van der Wal
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2005 May-Jun       Impact factor: 8.822

8.  Women and health care professionals' preferences for Down's Syndrome screening tests: a conjoint analysis study.

Authors:  Amanda J Bishop; Theresa M Marteau; David Armstrong; Lyn S Chitty; Louise Longworth; Martin J Buxton; Cheryl Berlin
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 6.531

9.  ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 88, December 2007. Invasive prenatal testing for aneuploidy.

Authors: 
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 7.661

10.  Favorable attitudes toward testing for chromosomal abnormalities via analysis of fetal cells in maternal blood.

Authors:  S T Zamerowski; M A Lumley; R A Arreola; K Dukes; L Sullivan
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2001 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 8.822

View more
  36 in total

1.  "This lifetime commitment": Public conceptions of disability and noninvasive prenatal genetic screening.

Authors:  Rosemary J Steinbach; Megan Allyse; Marsha Michie; Emily Y Liu; Mildred K Cho
Journal:  Am J Med Genet A       Date:  2015-11-14       Impact factor: 2.802

2.  "Don't Want No Risk and Don't Want No Problems": Public Understandings of the Risks and Benefits of Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing in the United States.

Authors:  Megan Allyse; Lauren Carter Sayres; Taylor Goodspeed; Marsha Michie; Mildred K Cho
Journal:  AJOB Empir Bioeth       Date:  2015

3.  Benefits, challenges and ethical principles associated with implementing noninvasive prenatal testing: a Delphi study.

Authors:  Charles Dupras; Stanislav Birko; Aliya Affdal; Hazar Haidar; Marie-Eve Lemoine; Vardit Ravitsky
Journal:  CMAJ Open       Date:  2018-10-31

4.  Will the introduction of non-invasive prenatal testing for Down's syndrome undermine informed choice?

Authors:  Caroline Silcock; Lih-Mei Liao; Melissa Hill; Lyn S Chitty
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2014-02-20       Impact factor: 3.377

5.  Non-invasive prenatal testing: UK genetic counselors' experiences and perspectives.

Authors:  Elizabeth Alexander; Susan Kelly; Lauren Kerzin-Storrar
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2014-10-15       Impact factor: 2.537

6.  Demographic and experiential correlates of public attitudes towards cell-free fetal DNA screening.

Authors:  Lauren C Sayres; Megan Allyse; Taylor A Goodspeed; Mildred K Cho
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2014-04-09       Impact factor: 2.537

7.  Attitudes of mothers of children with down syndrome towards noninvasive prenatal testing.

Authors:  Gregory Kellogg; Leah Slattery; Louanne Hudgins; Kelly Ormond
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2014-02-01       Impact factor: 2.537

8.  Best ethical practices for clinicians and laboratories in the provision of noninvasive prenatal testing.

Authors:  M A Allyse; L C Sayres; M Havard; J S King; H T Greely; L Hudgins; J Taylor; M E Norton; M K Cho; D Magnus; K E Ormond
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2013-05-21       Impact factor: 3.050

9.  Non-invasive fetal genome sequencing: opportunities and challenges.

Authors:  Holly K Tabor; Jeffrey C Murray; Hilary S Gammill; Jacob O Kitzman; Matthew W Snyder; Mario Ventura; Alexandra P Lewis; Ruolan Qiu; LaVone E Simmons; Craig E Rubens; Mark K Santillan; Evan E Eichler; Edith Y Cheng; Michael J Bamshad; Jay Shendure
Journal:  Am J Med Genet A       Date:  2012-08-10       Impact factor: 2.802

10.  Spanish- and English-Speaking Pregnant Women's Views on cfDNA and Other Prenatal Screening: Practical and Ethical Reflections.

Authors:  Erin Floyd; Megan A Allyse; Marsha Michie
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2016-01-07       Impact factor: 2.537

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.