NIPT reference library

Academic studies and papers associated with NIPD and NIPT

Cost effectivness

2015

Conner P, Gustafsson S, Kublickas M. First trimester contingent testing with either nuchal translucency or cell-free DNA. Cost efficiency and the role of ultrasound dating. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica. 2015;94(4):368-75. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25581307

Teitelbaum L, Metcalfe A, Clarke G, Parboosingh JS, Wilson RD, Johnson JM. Costs and benefits of non-invasive fetal RhD determination. Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2015;45(1):84-8. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25380024

2014

Neyt M, Hulstaert F, Gyselaers W. Introducing the non-invasive prenatal test for trisomy 21 in Belgium: a cost-consequences analysis. BMJ Open. 2014;4(11):e005922. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25380810

Beulen L, Grutters JP, Faas BH, Feenstra I, van Vugt JM, Bekker MN. The consequences of implementing non-invasive prenatal testing in Dutch national health care: a cost-effectiveness analysis. European Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Biology. 2014;182c:53-61. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25238658

Evans MI, Sonek JD, Hallahan TW, Krantz DA. Cell-Free Fetal DNA Screening in the United States: A Cost Analysis of Screening Strategies. Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2014. [Epub ahead of print] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25315699

Okun N, Teitelbaum M, Huang T, Dewa CS, Hoch JS. The price of performance: a cost and performance analysis of the implementation of cell-free fetal DNA testing for Down syndrome in Ontario, Canada. Prenat Diagn. 2014 34(4):350-6. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24395030

Morris S, Karlsen S, Chung N, Hill M, Chitty LS. Model-Based Analysis of Costs and Outcomes of Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing for Down’s Syndrome Using Cell Free Fetal DNA in the UK National Health Service. PLoS One. 2014 9(4):e93559. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24714162

2013

Ohno M, Caughey A. The role of noninvasive prenatal testing as a diagnostic versus a screening tool – a cost-effectiveness analysis. Prenat Diagn. 2013 Jul;33(7):630-5.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23674316

Cuckle H, Benn P, Pergament E. Maternal cfDNA screening for Down syndrome – a cost sensitivity analysis. Prenat Diagn. 2013 33(7):636-42. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23674341

2011

Hill MK, Sally Taffinder S, Chitty LS, Morris S: Incremental cost of non-invasive prenatal diagnosis versus invasive prenatal diagnosis of fetal sex in England. Prenat Diagn 2011; 31: 267-73. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21207386