Discover Community Create You

Loading publication...

Noodle always counts identifier-free feature events for service operation. With your permission, Google Analytics can also estimate audience and engagement. Search text, publication identifiers, cookies, IP addresses and browser fingerprints are never included in Noodle's first-party event counters.

Privacy details

Article

A cross‐country comparison of pregnant women's decision‐making and perspectives when opting for non‐invasive prenatal testing in the Netherlands and Belgium

6 Feb 2023

Abstract excerpt

BACKGROUND: The Netherlands and Belgium have been among the first countries to offer non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) as a first-tier screening test. Despite similarities, differences exist in counseling modalities and test uptake. This study explored decision-making and perspectives of pregnant women who opted for NIPT in both countries. METHODS: A questionnaire study was performed among pregnant women in...

Read the complete abstract on PubMed

Topics

Share this publication in a Topic to start or enrich a Post.

Share to BRCA gene mutations in cancer
Share to Fetal and Pediatric Neurological Disorders
Share to Prenatal Screening and Diagnostics

Methodology Data sources Editorial policy Privacy About Contact Helena Bioinformatics

Source

Identifiers

PMID: 36740754
DOI: 10.1002/pd.6329

Provenance

PubMed metadata and Literature Corpus relationships. Corpus snapshot updated 6 Sept 2026.

Related research

Semantic proximity does not establish scientific evidence.

Research trail→

Click a neighbor to travelStep 1 · 12 closest

A cross‐country comparison of pregnant women's decision‐making and perspectives when opting for non‐invasive prenatal testing in the Netherlands and BelgiumPMID 36740754Read ↗

Decision-Making Process about Prenatal Genetic Screening: How deeply do Moms-to-Be Want to Know from Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing?Semantic proximity Read ↗

The ethical landscape(s) of non-invasive prenatal testing in England, France and Germany: findings from a comparative literature reviewSemantic proximity Read ↗

Non-invasive prenatal testing in Germany: a unique ethical and policy landscapeSemantic proximity Read ↗

Evidence-based obstetric ethics and informed decision-making by pregnant women about invasive diagnosis after first-trimester assessment of risk for trisomy 21Semantic proximity Read ↗

<scp>UK NHS</scp> pilot study on cell‐free <scp>DNA</scp> testing in screening for fetal trisomies: factors affecting uptakeSemantic proximity Read ↗

NIPT: current utilization and implications for the future of prenatal genetic counselingSemantic proximity Read ↗

NIPT-based screening for Down syndrome and beyond: what do pregnant women think?Semantic proximity Read ↗

Women's Experience with Non‐Invasive Prenatal Testing and Emotional Well‐being and Satisfaction after Test‐ResultsSemantic proximity Read ↗

Attitudes of Israeli parents of children with Down syndrome toward non‐invasive prenatal screening and the scope of prenatal testingSemantic proximity Read ↗

Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices of Women Toward Prenatal Genetic TestingSemantic proximity Read ↗

Offering a choice between NIPT and invasive PND in prenatal genetic counseling: the impact of clinician characteristics on patients’ test uptakeSemantic proximity Read ↗

Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) and pregnant women’s views on good motherhood: a qualitative studySemantic proximity Read ↗

⌁Select a neighboring publication to make it the new centre.