Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19323962›Full record

ReviewCurrent diabetes reports2009

Genome-wide association studies in type 2 diabetes.

Mark I McCarthy, Eleftheria Zeggini

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current diabetes reports, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 107 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
107citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

107 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Genes and Elite Marathon Running Performance: A Systematic Review.Journal of sports science & medicine · 2019
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

47 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Mark I McCarthyOxford Centre for Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolism, Churchill Hospital, Old Road, Headington, Oxford, OX3 7LJ, UK. mark.mccarthy@drl.ox.ac.uk
Eleftheria Zeggini

Funding

Wellcome Trust 079557Wellcome Trust 088885
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite numerous candidate gene and linkage studies, the field of type 2 diabetes (T2D) genetics had until recently succeeded in identifying few genuine disease-susceptibility loci. The advent of genome-wide association (GWA) scans has transformed the situation, leading to an expansion in the number of established, robustly replicating T2D loci to almost 20. These novel findings offer unique insights into the pathogenesis of T2D and in the main point toward the etiologic importance of disorders of beta-cell development and function. All associated variants have common allele frequencies in the discovery populations, and exert modest to small effects on the risk of disease, characteristics that limit their prognostic and diagnostic potential. However, ongoing studies focusing on the role of copy number variation and targeting low-frequency polymorphisms should identify additional T2D susceptibility loci, some of which may have larger effect sizes and offer better individual prediction of disease risk.

Indexed as

Genome-Wide Association StudyDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2Genetic Predisposition to DiseaseHumansMeta-Analysis as Topic

Identifiers

PMID19323962
PMCPMC2694564

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.