Cited by 16Prenatal Screening and DiagnosticsSocial Media in Health EducationReproductive Health and Technologies

Discussing non‐invasive prenatal testing on Reddit: The benefits, the concerns, and the comradery

Marcon, Alessandro R., Ravitsky, Vardit, Caulfield, Timothy·2021·Prenatal Diagnosis

Abstract

Objective: As the use of non‐invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) increases, its benefits and concerns are being examined through surveys, qualitative studies, and bioethical analysis. However, only scant research has examined public discourse on the topic. This research examined NIPT discussions on the social media platform Reddit. Method: Content and qualitative description analysis was performed on 98 NIPT discussions (2682 comments), obtained by inputting “NIPT” into Reddit's search engine. Results: Detailing of benefits and concerns was found in collaborative and supportive discussions. Overall, NIPT is seen as valuable and desirable. Some concerns focused on cost‐related barriers to access, anxiety related to testing, and interpretation of results. NIPT is often portrayed as offering peace of mind and is sometimes described as a means of preparing for possible outcomes. Conclusion: In the discussions analyzed, NIPT is seen, overall, as valuable and greater access to it is desired. Some questions and concerns about NIPT were evident. Reddit stands as a valuable and appreciated tool for individuals wishing to discuss NIPT and to solicit and share information, opinions, and experiences. Health care providers should consider the ways social platforms such as Reddit can be engaged to better inform and educate the public.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/pd.5841

Cites

56 of 56 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 58 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Marcon, A. R., Ravitsky, V., & Caulfield, T.
Affiliations
  • University of Alberta (CA)
  • Université de Montréal (CA)
Corresponding author
Caulfield, Timothy
Venue
Prenatal Diagnosis
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-11-08
Volume
41
Issue
1
Pages
100-110
ISSN
  • 0197-3851 (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0223
OpenAlex
W3093108095
Cited by
16
References
58
Citations by year
2025: 5 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3
FWCI
2.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Prenatal Diagnosis (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Genome Canada
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Prenatal Screening and Diagnostics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Social Media in Health Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Reproductive Health and Technologies
Keywords
non-invasive prenatal testing, Reddit, online public discourse, social media, public perception, prenatal anxiety, test result interpretation, online support groups, health information seeking
MeSH terms
Noninvasive Prenatal Testing, Female, Humans, Pregnancy, Prenatal Diagnosis, Social Support, Social Media

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review