A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT) Implementation in Japan: A Comparison with the United Kingdom, Germany, Italy, Sweden, and Taiwan. | LitMetric

AI Article Synopsis

  • A study assessed the challenges of Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT) adoption in Japan, noting issues with access, cost, and uniformity since the guidelines were introduced in 2013.
  • Japan's NIPT process differs significantly from countries like the UK and Germany, with strict eligibility requirements (only for women over 35) and no comprehensive policy on information dissemination or abortion procedures for fetal abnormalities.
  • The conclusion calls for a more pregnant woman-centered approach to prenatal diagnosis in Japan, advocating for improved policies that consider successful practices from other countries.

Article Abstract

Introduction: The Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT) guideline was issued and applied in 2013 by the Japanese Medical Association. Since being issued, the NIPT practice in Japan still has some problems related to indication, access, cost coverage and uniformity. Therefore, our study aimed to identify the Japanese challenges of adopting NIPT into prenatal diagnosis by comparing the system and process with other countries.

Method: The United Kingdom, Germany, Italy, Sweden, and Taiwan were purposefully selected for comparison. All the countries, including Japan, introduced NIPT. The literature and information searches were conducted using PubMed, SCOPUS, Google Scholar, CiNii and Google searching engine.

Results: The process of NIPT in Japan was very different from the other countries. Japan is the only country that indicated NIPT for only pregnant women over 35 years old in certificated facilities and did not have a policy regarding providing information on prenatal screening and NIPT to all women. Japan also did not have a policy regarding abortion due to fetal abnormalities. The practice of NIPT guidelines is different between non-certified and certified facilities. NIPT fee was the highest in Japan and was not covered by insurance.

Conclusion: Pregnant women in Japan suffered from disparities in information access, economic burden, geographic location, and practice of NIPT guidelines between the certified and the non-certified facilities. Pregnant women-centered prenatal diagnosis policy, including NIPT, should be established in Japan by learning cases from other countries.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9778094PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192416404DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

nipt
12
japan
9
non-invasive prenatal
8
prenatal testing
8
testing nipt
8
united kingdom
8
kingdom germany
8
germany italy
8
italy sweden
8
sweden taiwan
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!