Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20235850›Full record

ArticleAnnual review of public health2010

Genome-wide association studies and beyond.

John S Witte

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annual review of public health, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 81 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
81citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

81 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Is Virulence GeneInfectious disease reports · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Frontiers in plant science · 2026
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

John S WitteInstitute for Human Genetics, Departments of Epidemiology and Biostatistics and Urology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California 94158-9001, USA. jwitte@ucsf.edu

Funding

Genetic Epidemiology of Prostate Cancer Risk and ProgressionR01CA088164 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI VAN DEN EEDEN, STEPHEN K., WITTE, JOHN S. · 2000 to 2015
$6.1M
Genomewide Association Study of Prostate CancerU01CA127298 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI WITTE, JOHN S. · 2008 to 2012
$5.1M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA088164NCI NIH HHS R01 CA88164NCI NIH HHS U01 CA127298
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) provide an important avenue for undertaking an agnostic evaluation of the association between common genetic variants and risk of disease. Recent advances in our understanding of human genetic variation and the technology to measure such variation have made GWAS feasible. Over the past few years a multitude of GWAS have identified and replicated many associated variants. These findings are enriching our knowledge about the genetic basis of disease and leading some to advocate using GWA study results for genetic testing. For many of the GWA study results, however, the underlying mechanisms remain unclear and the findings explain only a limited amount of heritability. These issues may be clarified by more detailed investigations, including analyses of less common variants, sequence-level data, and environmental exposures. Such studies should help clarify the potential value of genetic testing to the public's health.

Indexed as

DNA Copy Number VariationsGenetic TestingGenome-Wide Association StudyHumansLinkage DisequilibriumPolymorphism, Single NucleotidePopulation Surveillance

Identifiers

PMID20235850
PMCPMC3997166

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.