Bias and Inaccuracy in Marketing Noninvasive Prenatal Tests
By Editors,
The Hastings Center
| 03. 08. 2022
Photo by Scott via wikimedia
Bias and inaccuracy are pervasive in the marketing of noninvasive prenatal tests (NIPTs), concludes an early-view study in the Hastings Center Report. The tests are marketed to consumers around the world without regulatory oversight.
NIPTs are screening tests that assess the chance that a fetus is affected by various chromosomal and other conditions by analyzing fetal DNA in a maternal blood sample. In the absence of regulation, the responsibility to ensure that NIPTs are represented accurately and ethically falls to manufacturers.
The study examined whether manufacturers live up to this responsibility by evaluating English-language consumer brochures for NIPTs marketed globally. For a benchmark, the study used a guidance document produced by the Nuffield Council on Bioethics in the United Kingdom. Among the major findings:
- None of the brochures complied with all of the Council’s criteria.
- Fifty-two percent of the brochures misrepresented NIPTs as diagnostic rather than screening tests. Patients who do not understand that follow-up diagnostic testing is required to confirm a positive NIPT result may make decisions about their pregnancy, such as having...
Related Articles
By Nicholas Wade, The New York Times | 04.30.2026
“J. Craig Venter” via Wikimedia Commons licensed under CC by 2.5
J. Craig Venter, a scientist and entrepreneur who raced to decode the human genome, died on Wednesday in San Diego. He was 79.
His death was announced by...
By Jonathan Basile, Los Ángeles Review of Books | 04.29.2026
WILLIAM BATESON, a foundational figure in the science of genetics at the turn of the last century, once recounted the response of a Scottish soldier to one of his public lectures: “Sir, what ye’re telling us is nothing but Scientific...
By Alex Aylward, Daniel J. Fairbanks, Maria Kiladi, and Gregory Radick , Heredity | 04.20.2026
Genetics and eugenics co-evolved at the beginning of the twentieth century and remained associated through the 1940s and beyond. Early geneticists were far from unanimous in their views on eugenics; some avidly supported the movement, whereas others openly opposed it...
By Staff, GMWatch | 03.28.2026
Following a recent podcast interview we were asked whether there is any solid scientific research looking at how gene expression or molecular composition in genetically modified (GM) plants differs from conventionally bred plants. As this is an interesting and important...