ArticleMolecular syndromology2015
Genomic sequencing and the impact of molecular diagnosis on patient care.
Article in Molecular syndromology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- D-Bifunctional Protein Deficiency Diagnosis-A Challenge in Low Resource Settings: Case Report and Review of the Literature.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Sequencing Newborns: A Call for Nuanced Use of Genomic Technologies.The Hastings Center report · 2018Article
- A 2.5-year snapshot of Mendelian discovery.Molecular genetics & genomic medicine · 2016Article
- Diagnosis of D-Bifunctional Protein Deficiency through Whole-Genome Sequencing: Implications for Cost-Effective Care.Molecular syndromology · 2015Article
- The Benefits of Whole-Genome Sequencing Now and in the Future.Molecular syndromology · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Evolving sequencing technologies allow more accurate, efficient and affordable genomic analysis. As a result, these technologies are increasingly available, especially to provide molecular diagnoses for patients with suspected genetic disorders. However, there are many challenges to using genomic sequencing to benefit patients, including concerns that there is insufficient evidence that identifying an underlying molecular explanation may positively impact a patient's healthcare. This concern has many repercussions, including funding and/or (in some countries and healthcare systems) insurance reimbursement for genomic sequencing. To investigate this concern, all monogenic disorders were analyzed based on the impact of achieving molecular diagnosis. Of the 2,849 individual genes in which germline mutations cause disorders (not including contiguous gene syndromes or what may be categorized as susceptibility alleles), our analyses showed a specific, available intervention related to at least one affected organ system for 1,419 (49.8%) genes. In 95.6% of these genes, the intervention(s) would be recommended during the pediatric time frame.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.