Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23982363›Full record

ArticleJAMA2013

Revealing the incidentalome when targeting the tumor genome.

Yvonne Bombard, Mark Robson, Kenneth Offit

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed
–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

38 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Limited Independent Follow-Up with Germline Testing of Variants Detected inJournal of immunotherapy and precision oncology · 2024
    Article
  4. Preparing for the unexpected: Recommendations for returning secondary findings in late-stage cancer care.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. The ins and outs of molecular pathology reporting.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2017
    Review
  17. Article
  18. The future of clinical cancer genomics.Seminars in oncology · 2016
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Germline Analysis from Tumor-Germline Sequencing Dyads to Identify Clinically Actionable Secondary Findings.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2016
    Article
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

3 authors.

Yvonne BombardClinical Genetics Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York 10021, USA.
Mark Robson
Kenneth Offit

Funding

Clinical and Translational Science CenterUL1TR000457 · NCATS · WEILL MEDICAL COLL OF CORNELL UNIV · PI IMPERATO-MCGINLEY, JULIANNE L · 2012 to 2016
$46.0M
CIHRNCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000457
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as

DisclosureDNA, NeoplasmIncidental FindingsPrecision MedicineDecision MakingGenetic CounselingGenetic TestingGerm-Line MutationHumansNeoplasmsProspective StudiesRetrospective StudiesSequence Analysis, DNADNA, Neoplasm

Identifiers

PMID23982363
PMCPMC4018628

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.