EDP Sciences logo
Subscriber Authentication Point
Search
Menu
Home All issues Volume 35 / No 2 (Février 2019) Med Sci (Paris), 35 2 (2019) 163-168 References
Free Access
Issue
Med Sci (Paris)
Volume 35, Number 2, Février 2019
Page(s) 163 - 168
Section Repères
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/medsci/2019004
Published online 18 February 2019
  1. Plan France Médecine Génomique 2025. Alliance pour les sciences de la vie et de la santé. Paris : Aviesan, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  2. Anderson C. The end of theory: the data deluge makes the scientific method. Wired 2008. https://www.wired.com/2008/06/pb-theory/. [Google Scholar]
  3. Soulier A, Cambon-Thomsen A. Promesses de biobanques : se soucier de l’avenir dans l’éthique de la recherche biomédicale. Revue Française d‘Éthique Appliquée 2016; 2 : 29–47. [Google Scholar]
  4. Julia S, Bertier G, Cambon-Thomsen A. Quand l’anticipation devient plurielle: la complexité des données génomiques à l’épreuve des pratiques professionnelles. Revue Française d‘Éthique Appliquée 2016; 2 : 19–28. [Google Scholar]
  5. Parker M, Hope T. Medical ethics in the 21st century. J Intern Med 2000 ; 248 : 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  6. Rudnick A, Wada K. Introduction to bioethics in the 21st century. Bioethics in the 21st Century. InTech, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  7. La révision des lois de bioéthique. FAQ citoyens 2018. http://www.vie-publique.fr/actualite/faq-citoyens/bioethique/. [Google Scholar]
  8. Bianchi DW. From prenatal genomic diagnosis to fetal personalized medicine: progress and challenges. Nat Med 2012 ; 18 : 1041–1051. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Genomics market by product and services (instruments/systems, consumables, services), technology (sequencing, microarray, PCR), process (library preparation, sequencing, data analysis), application (diagnostics). Forecast to 2022, 2017. https://www.marketanalyst.net/. [Google Scholar]
  10. Institute NHGR. All about the human genome project (HGP). Bethesda: National Institutes of Health, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  11. Cyranoski D.. China embraces precision medicine on a massive scale. Nature News 2016 ; 529 : 9. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  12. Reardon S.. US precision-medicine proposal sparks questions. Nature 2015 ; 517 : 540. [Google Scholar]
  13. Sample I. Routine DNA tests will put NHS at the forefront of medicine. The Guardian, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  14. Birch K.. The neoliberal underpinnings of the bioeconomy: the ideological discourses and practices of economic competitiveness. Life Sci Soc Policy 2006 ; 2 : 1. [Google Scholar]
  15. Kakuk P.. Genetic information in the age of genohype. Med Health Care Philos 2006 ; 9 : 325–337. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Juengst ET, Settersten RA, Fishman JR, McGowan ML. After the revolution? Ethical and social challenges in personalized genomic medicine. Pers Med 2012 ; 9 : 429–439. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  17. Comité consultatif national d‘éthique. Questions éthiques associées au développement des tests génétiques fœtaux sur sang maternel. Avis n° 120. Paris : CCNE, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  18. Comité consultatif national d‘éthique. Réflexion éthique sur l’évolution des tests génétiques liée au séquençage de l’ADN humain à très haut débit. Avis n° 124. Paris : CCNE, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  19. Comité consultatif national d‘éthique. Contribution du Comité consultatif national d’éthique à la révision de la loi de bioéthique 2018–2019. Avis n° 129. Paris : CCNE, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  20. Hui L, Bianchi DW. Noninvasive prenatal DNA testing: the vanguard of genomic medicine. Annu Rev Med 2017 ; 68 : 459–472. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Safer screening test for pregnant women. Department of Health and Social Care, 2016. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/safer-screening-test-for-pregnant-women. [Google Scholar]
  22. Place des tests ADN libre circulant dans le sang maternel dans le dépistage de la trisomie 21 fœtale. Haute Autorité de Santé 2017. https://www.has-sante.fr/portail/jcms/c_2768510/fr/place-des-tests-adn-libre-circulant-dans-le-sang-maternel-dans-le-depistage-de-la-trisomie-21-foetale. [Google Scholar]
  23. Décret n° 2017–808 du 5 mai 2017 relatif à l‘introduction dans la liste des examens de diagnostic prénatal des examens de génétique portant sur l‘ADN fœtal libre circulant dans le sang maternel. Journal officiel de la République française, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  24. Drury S, Williams H, Trump N, et al. Exome sequencing for prenatal diagnosis of fetuses with sonographic abnormalities. Prenat Diagn 2015 ; 35 : 1010–1017. [Google Scholar]
  25. Löwy I. Imperfect pregnancies: A history of birth defects and prenatal diagnosis. Baltimore, États-Unis: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2017 296 p [Google Scholar]
  26. Lewis C, Silcock C, Chitty L. Non-invasive prenatal testing for Down‘s syndrome: pregnant women‘s views and likely uptake. Public Health Genomics 2013 ; 16 : 223–232. [Google Scholar]
  27. van Schendel RV, van El CG, Pajkrt E, et al. Implementing non-invasive prenatal testing for aneuploidy in a national healthcare system: global challenges and national solutions. BMC Health Serv Res 2017 ; 17 : 670. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Nuffield Council on Bioethics. Non-invasive prenatal testing. Ethical issues, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  29. Parens E, Asch A. Disability rights critique of prenatal genetic testing: Reflections and recommendations. Ment Retard Dev Disabil Res Rev 2003 ; 9 : 40–47. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Chapman AR, Benn PA. Noninvasive prenatal testing for early sex identification: a few benefits and many concerns. Perspect Biol Med 2013 ; 56 : 530–547. [Google Scholar]
  31. De Jong A, Dondorp WJ, de Die-Smulders CE, et al. Non-invasive prenatal testing: ethical issues explored. Eur J Hum Genet 2010 ; 18 : 272. [Google Scholar]
  32. Horn R, Parker M. Opening Pandora‘s box?: ethical issues in prenatal whole genome and exome sequencing. Prenat Diagn 2018 ; 38 : 20–25. [Google Scholar]
  33. Richardson A, Ormond KE. Ethical considerations in prenatal testing: genomic testing and medical uncertainty. Seminars in fetal and neonatal medicine 2017. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med 2018 ; 23 : 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  34. Vora NL, Powell B, Brandt A, et al. Prenatal exome sequencing in anomalous fetuses: new opportunities and challenges. Genet Med 2017 ; 19 : 1207. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Prenatal assessments of genomes and exomes (PAGE). https://www.pageuk.org. [Google Scholar]
  36. Newborn babies screened for more rare conditions. Public Health England, 2015. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/newborn-babies-screened-for-more-rare-conditions. [Google Scholar]
  37. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development What disorders are newborns screened for in the United States? Bethesda: National Institutes of Health, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  38. Jordan B.. Séquencer les bébés?-Chroniques génomiques. Med Sci (Paris) 2015 ; 31 : 929–932. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Whole genome sequencing of babies. Nuffield Council on Bioethics, 2018. http://nuffieldbioethics.org/project/briefing-notes/genome-sequencing-babies. [Google Scholar]
  40. Ormond KE, Mortlock DP, Scholes DT, et al. Human germline genome editing. Am J Hum Genet 2017 ; 101 : 167–176. [Google Scholar]
  41. Genome editing: an ethical review. Nuffield Council on Bioethics, 2018. http://nuffieldbioethics.org/project/genome-editing/ethical-review-published-september-2016. [Google Scholar]
  42. Marchione M. Chinese researcher claims first gene-edited babies. Associated Press, 2018 Available from: https://www.apnews.com/4997bb7aa36c45449b488e19ac83e86d. [Google Scholar]
  43. Horn R.. Euthanasia and end-of-life practices in France and Germany. A comparative study. Med Health Care Philos 2013 ; 16 : 197–209. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Blondel B, Kermarrec M. Les naissances en 2010 et leur évolution en 2003. Rapport 2011. https://drees.solidarites-sante.gouv.fr/etudes-et-statistiques/publications/recueils-ouvrages-et-rapports/rapports/article/les-naissances-en-2010-et-leur-evolution-en-2003. [Google Scholar]
  45. Ward P. Down’s syndrome screening in England. London : NHS Fetal Anomaly Screening Programme Committee UNS, 2011. https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/pregnancy-and-baby/screening-amniocentesis-downs-syndrome/. [Google Scholar]
  46. Vassy C, Rosman S, Rousseau B. From policy making to service use. Down‘s syndrome antenatal screening in England, France and the Netherlands. Social Science Medicine 2014; 106 : 67–74. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  47. Crombag NM, Vellinga YE, Kluijfhout SA, et al. Explaining variation in Down’s syndrome screening uptake: comparing the Netherlands with England and Denmark using documentary analysis and expert stakeholder interviews. BMC Health Services Research 2014 ; 14 : 437. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Gaille M. Des terres morales inconnues. Du diagnostic prénatal à la décision de poursuivre ou d’interrompre une grossesse. Anthropologie et Santé 12/2016. [Google Scholar]
  49. Williams C, Alderson P, Farsides B. Is nondirectiveness possible within the context o fantenatal screening and testing?. Social Science Medicine 2002 ; 54 : 339–347. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  50. Lewis C, Hill M, Chitty LS. Women’s experiences and preferences for service delivery of non-invasive prenatal testing for aneuploidy in a public health setting: a mixed methods study. PLoS One 2016 ; 11 : e0153147. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Piechan JL, Hines KA, Koller DL, et al. NIPT and informed consent: an assessment of patient understanding of a negative NIPT result. J Genet Couns 2016 ; 25 : 1127–1137. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Chitty LS, Wright D, Hill M, et al. Uptake, outcomes, and costs of implementing non-invasive prenatal testing for Down’s syndrome into NHS maternity care: prospective cohort study in eight diverse maternity units. BMJ 2016 ; 354 : i3426. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.