Loading…
First‐trimester screening based on cell‐free DNA vs combined screening: A randomized clinical trial on women's experience
Objective To compare women's experience of first‐trimester combined screening (FTCS), with women's experience of an approach that uses the combination of a detailed early anatomy scan and cell‐free DNA (cfDNA) analysis. Methods This was single‐center, open label, parallel group, randomized...
Saved in:
Published in: | Prenatal diagnosis 2020-10, Vol.40 (11), p.1482-1488 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3260-6ffd8dab1e08e772e4d8e8694e7ac2d0bf6d08bf6bf53de742711e0cd9020def3 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3260-6ffd8dab1e08e772e4d8e8694e7ac2d0bf6d08bf6bf53de742711e0cd9020def3 |
container_end_page | 1488 |
container_issue | 11 |
container_start_page | 1482 |
container_title | Prenatal diagnosis |
container_volume | 40 |
creator | Migliorini, Sonia Saccone, Gabriele Silvestro, Fiora Massaro, Giulia Arduino, Bruno D'Alessandro, Pietro Petti, Maria Teresa Paino, Jessica Anna Cinzia Guida, Maurizio Locci, Mariavittoria Zullo, Fulvio |
description | Objective
To compare women's experience of first‐trimester combined screening (FTCS), with women's experience of an approach that uses the combination of a detailed early anatomy scan and cell‐free DNA (cfDNA) analysis.
Methods
This was single‐center, open label, parallel group, randomized clinical trial. Pregnant women were randomized at the time of their first prenatal visit to either a policy of first‐trimester risk assessment based on FTCS, or to a policy of first‐trimester risk assessment based on ultrasound findings and cfDNA. FTCS included ultrasound evaluation with crown‐rump length, nuchal translucency (NT) measurement, and a detailed ultrasound scan, along with biochemistry (PAPP‐A and free beta hCG). In this group, invasive diagnostic testing was offered to patients with risk >1 in 100, or NT >3.5 mm, or any fetal abnormalities on ultrasound. Women randomized in the intervention group received an approach of first‐trimester risk assessment based on ultrasound findings and cfDNA. cfDNA analysis included a simultaneous microarray‐based assay of non‐polymorphic (chromosomes 13, 18, 21, X and Y) and polymorphic loci to estimate chromosome proportion and fetal fraction. In the intervention group, invasive diagnostic testing was offered to patients with abnormal cfDNA screening results, or NT >3.5 mm, or any fetal abnormalities on ultrasound. Participants received pre‐test and post‐test questionnaires regarding to measure reassurance, satisfaction, and anxiety. The primary outcome was the post‐test reassurance, defined as mean score of reassurance post‐test questionnaire. The effect of the assigned screening test on the mean of each outcome was quantified as mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI).
Results
Forty women with singleton gestations were enrolled in the trial. Mean score for reassurance was significantly higher in the cfDNA group compared to the FTCS group in the pre‐test questionnaire (MD 0.80 points, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.33) and in the post‐test questionnaire (MD 16.50 points, 95% CI 2.18 to 30.82). Women randomized to the cfDNA group had higher satisfaction and lower mean anxiety score as assessed in the STAI pre‐test questionnaire.
Conclusions
First‐trimester risk assessment for fetal aneuploidy with a combination of a detailed ultrasound examination and cfDNA is associated with better maternal reassurance and better maternal satisfaction compared to the standard first‐trimester combined screening with nuchal translucency, an |
doi_str_mv | 10.1002/pd.5800 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2425590663</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2425590663</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3260-6ffd8dab1e08e772e4d8e8694e7ac2d0bf6d08bf6bf53de742711e0cd9020def3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kd1KxDAQhYMo7rqKbyABLxSkmqY_Sb1b1FVB1Au9Lm0ylSxtWpOtfyD4CD6jT-Ksq14I3kzCzMdh5hxCNkO2HzLGDzq9n0jGlsgwZJkIGOfRMhmyEP-RTMIBWfN-iqDkmVglg4inMhJJMiSvE-P87OPtfeZMA34GjnrlAKyxd7QsPGjaWqqgrpGpcECPL8f0wVPVNqWxOP7FD-mYusLqtjEv2Fe1sUYVNUVlrKjy2DZgdzyFpw6cAatgnaxURe1h4_sdkdvJyc3RWXBxdXp-NL4IFG7KgrSqtNRFGQKTIASHWEuQaRaDKBTXrKxSzSTWskoiDSLmIkRW6YxxpqGKRmR3odu59r7HM_PG-PlRhYW29zmPeZJkLE0jRLf_oNO2dxa3QypBXwVaiNTOglKu9d5BlXfoX-Ge85Dl80TyTufzRJDc-tbrywb0L_cTAQJ7C-DR1PD8n05-ffwl9wm9mZaS</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2452237297</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>First‐trimester screening based on cell‐free DNA vs combined screening: A randomized clinical trial on women's experience</title><source>Wiley-Blackwell Read & Publish Collection</source><creator>Migliorini, Sonia ; Saccone, Gabriele ; Silvestro, Fiora ; Massaro, Giulia ; Arduino, Bruno ; D'Alessandro, Pietro ; Petti, Maria Teresa ; Paino, Jessica Anna Cinzia ; Guida, Maurizio ; Locci, Mariavittoria ; Zullo, Fulvio</creator><creatorcontrib>Migliorini, Sonia ; Saccone, Gabriele ; Silvestro, Fiora ; Massaro, Giulia ; Arduino, Bruno ; D'Alessandro, Pietro ; Petti, Maria Teresa ; Paino, Jessica Anna Cinzia ; Guida, Maurizio ; Locci, Mariavittoria ; Zullo, Fulvio</creatorcontrib><description>Objective
To compare women's experience of first‐trimester combined screening (FTCS), with women's experience of an approach that uses the combination of a detailed early anatomy scan and cell‐free DNA (cfDNA) analysis.
Methods
This was single‐center, open label, parallel group, randomized clinical trial. Pregnant women were randomized at the time of their first prenatal visit to either a policy of first‐trimester risk assessment based on FTCS, or to a policy of first‐trimester risk assessment based on ultrasound findings and cfDNA. FTCS included ultrasound evaluation with crown‐rump length, nuchal translucency (NT) measurement, and a detailed ultrasound scan, along with biochemistry (PAPP‐A and free beta hCG). In this group, invasive diagnostic testing was offered to patients with risk >1 in 100, or NT >3.5 mm, or any fetal abnormalities on ultrasound. Women randomized in the intervention group received an approach of first‐trimester risk assessment based on ultrasound findings and cfDNA. cfDNA analysis included a simultaneous microarray‐based assay of non‐polymorphic (chromosomes 13, 18, 21, X and Y) and polymorphic loci to estimate chromosome proportion and fetal fraction. In the intervention group, invasive diagnostic testing was offered to patients with abnormal cfDNA screening results, or NT >3.5 mm, or any fetal abnormalities on ultrasound. Participants received pre‐test and post‐test questionnaires regarding to measure reassurance, satisfaction, and anxiety. The primary outcome was the post‐test reassurance, defined as mean score of reassurance post‐test questionnaire. The effect of the assigned screening test on the mean of each outcome was quantified as mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI).
Results
Forty women with singleton gestations were enrolled in the trial. Mean score for reassurance was significantly higher in the cfDNA group compared to the FTCS group in the pre‐test questionnaire (MD 0.80 points, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.33) and in the post‐test questionnaire (MD 16.50 points, 95% CI 2.18 to 30.82). Women randomized to the cfDNA group had higher satisfaction and lower mean anxiety score as assessed in the STAI pre‐test questionnaire.
Conclusions
First‐trimester risk assessment for fetal aneuploidy with a combination of a detailed ultrasound examination and cfDNA is associated with better maternal reassurance and better maternal satisfaction compared to the standard first‐trimester combined screening with nuchal translucency, and biochemistry.
Trial registration
Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04077060.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0197-3851</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1097-0223</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/pd.5800</identifier><identifier>PMID: 32683755</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd</publisher><subject>Abnormalities ; Aneuploidy ; Anxiety ; Biochemistry ; Chromosomes ; Clinical trials ; Confidence intervals ; Deoxyribonucleic acid ; Diagnostic systems ; Diagnostic tests ; DNA ; DNA microarrays ; Fetuses ; Genetic screening ; Pregnancy ; Questionnaires ; Risk assessment ; Ultrasonic imaging ; Ultrasound ; Women</subject><ispartof>Prenatal diagnosis, 2020-10, Vol.40 (11), p.1482-1488</ispartof><rights>2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd</rights><rights>2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.</rights><rights>2020 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3260-6ffd8dab1e08e772e4d8e8694e7ac2d0bf6d08bf6bf53de742711e0cd9020def3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3260-6ffd8dab1e08e772e4d8e8694e7ac2d0bf6d08bf6bf53de742711e0cd9020def3</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-0078-2113</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32683755$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Migliorini, Sonia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saccone, Gabriele</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Silvestro, Fiora</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Massaro, Giulia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Arduino, Bruno</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>D'Alessandro, Pietro</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Petti, Maria Teresa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Paino, Jessica Anna Cinzia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guida, Maurizio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Locci, Mariavittoria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zullo, Fulvio</creatorcontrib><title>First‐trimester screening based on cell‐free DNA vs combined screening: A randomized clinical trial on women's experience</title><title>Prenatal diagnosis</title><addtitle>Prenat Diagn</addtitle><description>Objective
To compare women's experience of first‐trimester combined screening (FTCS), with women's experience of an approach that uses the combination of a detailed early anatomy scan and cell‐free DNA (cfDNA) analysis.
Methods
This was single‐center, open label, parallel group, randomized clinical trial. Pregnant women were randomized at the time of their first prenatal visit to either a policy of first‐trimester risk assessment based on FTCS, or to a policy of first‐trimester risk assessment based on ultrasound findings and cfDNA. FTCS included ultrasound evaluation with crown‐rump length, nuchal translucency (NT) measurement, and a detailed ultrasound scan, along with biochemistry (PAPP‐A and free beta hCG). In this group, invasive diagnostic testing was offered to patients with risk >1 in 100, or NT >3.5 mm, or any fetal abnormalities on ultrasound. Women randomized in the intervention group received an approach of first‐trimester risk assessment based on ultrasound findings and cfDNA. cfDNA analysis included a simultaneous microarray‐based assay of non‐polymorphic (chromosomes 13, 18, 21, X and Y) and polymorphic loci to estimate chromosome proportion and fetal fraction. In the intervention group, invasive diagnostic testing was offered to patients with abnormal cfDNA screening results, or NT >3.5 mm, or any fetal abnormalities on ultrasound. Participants received pre‐test and post‐test questionnaires regarding to measure reassurance, satisfaction, and anxiety. The primary outcome was the post‐test reassurance, defined as mean score of reassurance post‐test questionnaire. The effect of the assigned screening test on the mean of each outcome was quantified as mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI).
Results
Forty women with singleton gestations were enrolled in the trial. Mean score for reassurance was significantly higher in the cfDNA group compared to the FTCS group in the pre‐test questionnaire (MD 0.80 points, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.33) and in the post‐test questionnaire (MD 16.50 points, 95% CI 2.18 to 30.82). Women randomized to the cfDNA group had higher satisfaction and lower mean anxiety score as assessed in the STAI pre‐test questionnaire.
Conclusions
First‐trimester risk assessment for fetal aneuploidy with a combination of a detailed ultrasound examination and cfDNA is associated with better maternal reassurance and better maternal satisfaction compared to the standard first‐trimester combined screening with nuchal translucency, and biochemistry.
Trial registration
Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04077060.</description><subject>Abnormalities</subject><subject>Aneuploidy</subject><subject>Anxiety</subject><subject>Biochemistry</subject><subject>Chromosomes</subject><subject>Clinical trials</subject><subject>Confidence intervals</subject><subject>Deoxyribonucleic acid</subject><subject>Diagnostic systems</subject><subject>Diagnostic tests</subject><subject>DNA</subject><subject>DNA microarrays</subject><subject>Fetuses</subject><subject>Genetic screening</subject><subject>Pregnancy</subject><subject>Questionnaires</subject><subject>Risk assessment</subject><subject>Ultrasonic imaging</subject><subject>Ultrasound</subject><subject>Women</subject><issn>0197-3851</issn><issn>1097-0223</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kd1KxDAQhYMo7rqKbyABLxSkmqY_Sb1b1FVB1Au9Lm0ylSxtWpOtfyD4CD6jT-Ksq14I3kzCzMdh5hxCNkO2HzLGDzq9n0jGlsgwZJkIGOfRMhmyEP-RTMIBWfN-iqDkmVglg4inMhJJMiSvE-P87OPtfeZMA34GjnrlAKyxd7QsPGjaWqqgrpGpcECPL8f0wVPVNqWxOP7FD-mYusLqtjEv2Fe1sUYVNUVlrKjy2DZgdzyFpw6cAatgnaxURe1h4_sdkdvJyc3RWXBxdXp-NL4IFG7KgrSqtNRFGQKTIASHWEuQaRaDKBTXrKxSzSTWskoiDSLmIkRW6YxxpqGKRmR3odu59r7HM_PG-PlRhYW29zmPeZJkLE0jRLf_oNO2dxa3QypBXwVaiNTOglKu9d5BlXfoX-Ge85Dl80TyTufzRJDc-tbrywb0L_cTAQJ7C-DR1PD8n05-ffwl9wm9mZaS</recordid><startdate>202010</startdate><enddate>202010</enddate><creator>Migliorini, Sonia</creator><creator>Saccone, Gabriele</creator><creator>Silvestro, Fiora</creator><creator>Massaro, Giulia</creator><creator>Arduino, Bruno</creator><creator>D'Alessandro, Pietro</creator><creator>Petti, Maria Teresa</creator><creator>Paino, Jessica Anna Cinzia</creator><creator>Guida, Maurizio</creator><creator>Locci, Mariavittoria</creator><creator>Zullo, Fulvio</creator><general>John Wiley & Sons, Ltd</general><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0078-2113</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202010</creationdate><title>First‐trimester screening based on cell‐free DNA vs combined screening: A randomized clinical trial on women's experience</title><author>Migliorini, Sonia ; Saccone, Gabriele ; Silvestro, Fiora ; Massaro, Giulia ; Arduino, Bruno ; D'Alessandro, Pietro ; Petti, Maria Teresa ; Paino, Jessica Anna Cinzia ; Guida, Maurizio ; Locci, Mariavittoria ; Zullo, Fulvio</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3260-6ffd8dab1e08e772e4d8e8694e7ac2d0bf6d08bf6bf53de742711e0cd9020def3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Abnormalities</topic><topic>Aneuploidy</topic><topic>Anxiety</topic><topic>Biochemistry</topic><topic>Chromosomes</topic><topic>Clinical trials</topic><topic>Confidence intervals</topic><topic>Deoxyribonucleic acid</topic><topic>Diagnostic systems</topic><topic>Diagnostic tests</topic><topic>DNA</topic><topic>DNA microarrays</topic><topic>Fetuses</topic><topic>Genetic screening</topic><topic>Pregnancy</topic><topic>Questionnaires</topic><topic>Risk assessment</topic><topic>Ultrasonic imaging</topic><topic>Ultrasound</topic><topic>Women</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Migliorini, Sonia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saccone, Gabriele</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Silvestro, Fiora</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Massaro, Giulia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Arduino, Bruno</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>D'Alessandro, Pietro</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Petti, Maria Teresa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Paino, Jessica Anna Cinzia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guida, Maurizio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Locci, Mariavittoria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zullo, Fulvio</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Prenatal diagnosis</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Migliorini, Sonia</au><au>Saccone, Gabriele</au><au>Silvestro, Fiora</au><au>Massaro, Giulia</au><au>Arduino, Bruno</au><au>D'Alessandro, Pietro</au><au>Petti, Maria Teresa</au><au>Paino, Jessica Anna Cinzia</au><au>Guida, Maurizio</au><au>Locci, Mariavittoria</au><au>Zullo, Fulvio</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>First‐trimester screening based on cell‐free DNA vs combined screening: A randomized clinical trial on women's experience</atitle><jtitle>Prenatal diagnosis</jtitle><addtitle>Prenat Diagn</addtitle><date>2020-10</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>40</volume><issue>11</issue><spage>1482</spage><epage>1488</epage><pages>1482-1488</pages><issn>0197-3851</issn><eissn>1097-0223</eissn><abstract>Objective
To compare women's experience of first‐trimester combined screening (FTCS), with women's experience of an approach that uses the combination of a detailed early anatomy scan and cell‐free DNA (cfDNA) analysis.
Methods
This was single‐center, open label, parallel group, randomized clinical trial. Pregnant women were randomized at the time of their first prenatal visit to either a policy of first‐trimester risk assessment based on FTCS, or to a policy of first‐trimester risk assessment based on ultrasound findings and cfDNA. FTCS included ultrasound evaluation with crown‐rump length, nuchal translucency (NT) measurement, and a detailed ultrasound scan, along with biochemistry (PAPP‐A and free beta hCG). In this group, invasive diagnostic testing was offered to patients with risk >1 in 100, or NT >3.5 mm, or any fetal abnormalities on ultrasound. Women randomized in the intervention group received an approach of first‐trimester risk assessment based on ultrasound findings and cfDNA. cfDNA analysis included a simultaneous microarray‐based assay of non‐polymorphic (chromosomes 13, 18, 21, X and Y) and polymorphic loci to estimate chromosome proportion and fetal fraction. In the intervention group, invasive diagnostic testing was offered to patients with abnormal cfDNA screening results, or NT >3.5 mm, or any fetal abnormalities on ultrasound. Participants received pre‐test and post‐test questionnaires regarding to measure reassurance, satisfaction, and anxiety. The primary outcome was the post‐test reassurance, defined as mean score of reassurance post‐test questionnaire. The effect of the assigned screening test on the mean of each outcome was quantified as mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI).
Results
Forty women with singleton gestations were enrolled in the trial. Mean score for reassurance was significantly higher in the cfDNA group compared to the FTCS group in the pre‐test questionnaire (MD 0.80 points, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.33) and in the post‐test questionnaire (MD 16.50 points, 95% CI 2.18 to 30.82). Women randomized to the cfDNA group had higher satisfaction and lower mean anxiety score as assessed in the STAI pre‐test questionnaire.
Conclusions
First‐trimester risk assessment for fetal aneuploidy with a combination of a detailed ultrasound examination and cfDNA is associated with better maternal reassurance and better maternal satisfaction compared to the standard first‐trimester combined screening with nuchal translucency, and biochemistry.
Trial registration
Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04077060.</abstract><cop>Chichester, UK</cop><pub>John Wiley & Sons, Ltd</pub><pmid>32683755</pmid><doi>10.1002/pd.5800</doi><tpages>7</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0078-2113</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0197-3851 |
ispartof | Prenatal diagnosis, 2020-10, Vol.40 (11), p.1482-1488 |
issn | 0197-3851 1097-0223 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2425590663 |
source | Wiley-Blackwell Read & Publish Collection |
subjects | Abnormalities Aneuploidy Anxiety Biochemistry Chromosomes Clinical trials Confidence intervals Deoxyribonucleic acid Diagnostic systems Diagnostic tests DNA DNA microarrays Fetuses Genetic screening Pregnancy Questionnaires Risk assessment Ultrasonic imaging Ultrasound Women |
title | First‐trimester screening based on cell‐free DNA vs combined screening: A randomized clinical trial on women's experience |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-15T17%3A37%3A40IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=First%E2%80%90trimester%20screening%20based%20on%20cell%E2%80%90free%20DNA%20vs%20combined%20screening:%20A%20randomized%20clinical%20trial%20on%20women's%20experience&rft.jtitle=Prenatal%20diagnosis&rft.au=Migliorini,%20Sonia&rft.date=2020-10&rft.volume=40&rft.issue=11&rft.spage=1482&rft.epage=1488&rft.pages=1482-1488&rft.issn=0197-3851&rft.eissn=1097-0223&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/pd.5800&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2425590663%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3260-6ffd8dab1e08e772e4d8e8694e7ac2d0bf6d08bf6bf53de742711e0cd9020def3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2452237297&rft_id=info:pmid/32683755&rfr_iscdi=true |