Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26285306›Full record

ArticleHuman mutation2012

Diagnostic interpretation of array data using public databases and internet sources.

Nicole de Leeuw, Trijnie Dijkhuizen, Jayne Y Hehir-Kwa, Nigel P Carter, Lars Feuk, Helen V Firth, Robert M Kuhn, David H Ledbetter, Christa Lese Martin, Conny M A van Ravenswaaij-Arts and 6 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human mutation, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

44 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Copy Number Variants in Alzheimer's Disease.Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD · 2017
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Efficacy of active ingredients in Qingdai on ulcerative colitis: a network pharmacology-based evaluation.Journal of traditional Chinese medicine = Chung i tsa chih ying wen pan · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. European guidelines for constitutional cytogenomic analysis.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2019
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Structural variation in the 3D genome.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2018
    Review
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

16 authors.

Nicole de LeeuwDepartment of Human Genetics, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Trijnie Dijkhuizen
Jayne Y Hehir-Kwa
Nigel P Carter
Lars Feuk
Helen V Firth
Robert M Kuhn
David H Ledbetter
Christa Lese Martin
Conny M A van Ravenswaaij-Arts
Steven W Scherer
Soheil Shams
Steven Van Vooren
Rolf Sijmons
Morris Swertz
Ros Hastings

Funding

The UCSC Genome BrowserU41HG002371 · NHGRI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SANTA CRUZ · PI KENT, WILLIAM JAMES · 2012 to 2021
$36.6M
NHGRI NIH HHS U41 HG002371Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust WT077008
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The range of commercially available array platforms and analysis software packages is expanding and their utility is improving, making reliable detection of copy-number variants (CNVs) relatively straightforward. Reliable interpretation of CNV data, however, is often difficult and requires expertise. With our knowledge of the human genome growing rapidly, applications for array testing continuously broadening, and the resolution of CNV detection increasing, this leads to great complexity in interpreting what can be daunting data. Correct CNV interpretation and optimal use of the genotype information provided by single-nucleotide polymorphism probes on an array depends largely on knowledge present in various resources. In addition to the availability of host laboratories' own datasets and national registries, there are several public databases and Internet resources with genotype and phenotype information that can be used for array data interpretation. With so many resources now available, it is important to know which are fit-for-purpose in a diagnostic setting. We summarize the characteristics of the most commonly used Internet databases and resources, and propose a general data interpretation strategy that can be used for comparative hybridization, comparative intensity, and genotype-based array data.

Indexed as

Databases, GeneticDiagnostic Tests, RoutineDNA Copy Number VariationsInternetSoftwareGenetic VariationGenome, HumanHumansOligonucleotide Array Sequence AnalysisPolymorphism, Single NucleotideSearch Engine

Identifiers

PMID26285306
PMCPMC5027376

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.