Article Text
Ethics briefing
Ethics briefing
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.
Patient consent for publication Not required.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Uptake, outcomes, and costs of implementing non-invasive prenatal testing for Down’s syndrome into NHS maternity care: prospective cohort study in eight diverse maternity units
- Non-invasive prenatal testing in mitigating concerns from invasive prenatal diagnostic testing: retrospective assessment of utility in an academic healthcare system in the US
- ‘Is it better not to know certain things?’: views of women who have undergone non-invasive prenatal testing on its possible future applications
- Introducing the non-invasive prenatal testing for detection of Down syndrome in China: a cost-effectiveness analysis
- Non-invasive prenatal diagnosis: progress and potential
- Should pregnant women be charged for non-invasive prenatal screening? Implications for reproductive autonomy and equal access
- Women’s choices in non-invasive prenatal testing for aneuploidy screening: results from a single centre prior to introduction in England
- Extending non-invasive prenatal testing to non-invasive prenatal diagnosis
- Non-invasive prenatal testing for aneuploidy screening
- Accuracy of non-invasive prenatal testing using cell-free DNA for detection of Down, Edwards and Patau syndromes: a systematic review and meta-analysis