Article Text
PDFCommentary
Navigating the ambiguity of invasiveness: is it warranted? A response to De Marco et al
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Contributors NST is a psychiatry resident at Cape Fear Valley Medical Center in North Carolina who focuses his research on the intersection of medicine, religion and belief.
Funding The author has 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.
Linked Articles
- Feature article
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- What makes a medical intervention invasive?
- Introducing the non-invasive prenatal test for trisomy 21 in Belgium: a cost-consequences analysis
- Non-invasive prenatal testing in mitigating concerns from invasive prenatal diagnostic testing: retrospective assessment of utility in an academic healthcare system in the US
- Accuracy of non-invasive prenatal testing using cell-free DNA for detection of Down, Edwards and Patau syndromes: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- Mainstreaming genetics into Italian prenatal care: exploring the future implementation of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) in the Italian National Healthcare System using stakeholder interviews
- Non-invasive prenatal diagnosis: progress and potential
- Women’s choices in non-invasive prenatal testing for aneuploidy screening: results from a single centre prior to introduction in England
- Non-invasive prenatal testing for aneuploidy screening
- 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
- Cell-free fetal DNA and RNA in maternal blood: implications for safer antenatal testing