Demographic and experiential correlates of public attitudes towards cell-free fetal DNA screening
- PMID: 24715419
- PMCID: PMC4192103
- DOI: 10.1007/s10897-014-9704-9
Demographic and experiential correlates of public attitudes towards cell-free fetal DNA screening
Abstract
This study seeks to inform clinical application of cell-free fetal DNA (cffDNA) screening as a novel method for prenatal trisomy detection by investigating public attitudes towards this technology and demographic and experiential characteristics related to these attitudes. Two versions of a 25-item survey assessing interest in cffDNA and existing first-trimester combined screening for either trisomy 13 and 18 or trisomy 21 were distributed among 3,164 members of the United States public. Logistic regression was performed to determine variables predictive of interest in screening options. Approximately 47% of respondents expressed an interest in cffDNA screening for trisomy 13, 18, and 21, with a majority interested in cffDNA screening as a stand-alone technique. A significantly greater percent would consider termination of pregnancy following a diagnosis of trisomy 13 or 18 (52%) over one of trisomy 21 (44%). Willingness to consider abortion of an affected pregnancy was the strongest correlate to interest in both cffDNA and first-trimester combined screening, although markedly more respondents expressed an interest in some form of screening (69% and 71%, respectively) than would consider termination. Greater educational attainment, higher income, and insurance coverage predicted interest in cffDNA screening; stronger religious identification also corresponded to decreased interest. Prior experience with disability and genetic testing was associated with increased interest in cffDNA screening. Several of these factors, in addition to advanced age and Asian race, were, in turn, predictive of respondents' increased willingness to consider post-diagnosis termination of pregnancy. In conclusion, divergent attitudes towards cffDNA screening--and prenatal options more generally--appear correlated with individual socioeconomic and religious backgrounds and experiences with disability and genetic testing. Clinical implementation and counseling for novel prenatal technologies should take these diverse stakeholder values into consideration.
Conflict of interest statement
None of the authors has a conflict of interest of a financial or other nature. Authors have full control of all primary data and agree to allow the journal to review our data upon request.
Figures




Similar articles
-
Clinical implementation of routine screening for fetal trisomies in the UK NHS: cell-free DNA test contingent on results from first-trimester combined test.Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Jan;47(1):45-52. doi: 10.1002/uog.15783. Epub 2015 Oct 26. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2016. PMID: 26498918
-
Analysis of first-trimester combined test results in preparation for a cell-free fetal DNA era.Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2016 Nov;135(2):187-191. doi: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2016.05.014. Epub 2016 Aug 11. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2016. PMID: 27569022
-
Cell-free fetal DNA screening in the USA: a cost analysis of screening strategies.Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Jan;45(1):74-83. doi: 10.1002/uog.14693. Epub 2014 Dec 9. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015. PMID: 25315699
-
[Noninvasive prenatal diagnosis of trisomy 21, 18 and 13 using cell-free fetal DNA].Ginekol Pol. 2013 Aug;84(8):714-9. doi: 10.17772/gp/1629. Ginekol Pol. 2013. PMID: 24191506 Review. Polish.
-
[Combined first trimester screening and cell-free fetal DNA - “next generation screening”].Ultraschall Med. 2014 Jun;35(3):229-36. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1366353. Epub 2014 Apr 24. Ultraschall Med. 2014. PMID: 24764214 Review. German.
Cited by
-
"The Top Priority Is a Healthy Baby": Narratives of Health, Disability, and Abortion in Online Pregnancy Forum Discussions in the US and China.J Genet Couns. 2017 Feb;26(1):32-39. doi: 10.1007/s10897-016-9976-3. Epub 2016 Jun 9. J Genet Couns. 2017. PMID: 27277130
-
How should costs and cost-effectiveness be considered in prenatal genetic testing?Semin Perinatol. 2018 Aug;42(5):275-282. doi: 10.1053/j.semperi.2018.07.003. Epub 2018 Jul 26. Semin Perinatol. 2018. PMID: 30173949 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Approaches to engaging faith communities in public health efforts regarding vaccination, genetics, and colorectal cancer: a systematic review.BMC Public Health. 2025 Feb 20;25(1):703. doi: 10.1186/s12889-025-21903-4. BMC Public Health. 2025. PMID: 39979841 Free PMC article.
-
Religious factors predict support for genomic medicine more strongly than politics, education, or trust: A survey of 4,939 adults in the United States.Front Genet. 2025 Jun 4;16:1587774. doi: 10.3389/fgene.2025.1587774. eCollection 2025. Front Genet. 2025. PMID: 40534838 Free PMC article.
-
Expanding Use of cfDNA Screening in Pregnancy: Current and Emerging Ethical, Legal, and Social Issues.Curr Genet Med Rep. 2017 Mar;5(1):44-53. doi: 10.1007/s40142-017-0113-x. Epub 2017 Feb 11. Curr Genet Med Rep. 2017. PMID: 38089918 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Benn P, Borrell A, Cuckle H, Dugoff L, Gross S, Johnson J, Yaron Y. Prenatal detection of Down syndrome using massively parallel sequencing (MPS): a rapid response statement from a committee on behalf of the Board of the International Society for Prenatal Diagnosis. 2011 from http://www.ispdhome.org/public/news/2011/ISPD_RapidResponse_MPS_24Oct11.pdf. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical