Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29398702›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Genetics2018

Paediatric genomics: diagnosing rare disease in children.

Caroline F Wright, David R FitzPatrick, Helen V Firth

Erratum issuedAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Genetics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 285 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
285citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Review
  11. Variable Expressiveness of a Novel PathogenicDiseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Caroline F WrightUniversity of Exeter Medical School, Institute of Biomedical and Clinical Science, Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital, Barrack Road, Exeter EX2 5DW, UK.
David R FitzPatrickMedical Research Council Human Genetics Unit, The Institute of Genetics and Molecular Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH4 2XU, UK.
Helen V FirthCambridge University Hospitals National Health Service Foundation Trust, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Hills Road, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_UU_00007/3
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The majority of rare diseases affect children, most of whom have an underlying genetic cause for their condition. However, making a molecular diagnosis with current technologies and knowledge is often still a challenge. Paediatric genomics is an immature but rapidly evolving field that tackles this issue by incorporating next-generation sequencing technologies, especially whole-exome sequencing and whole-genome sequencing, into research and clinical workflows. This complex multidisciplinary approach, coupled with the increasing availability of population genetic variation data, has already resulted in an increased discovery rate of causative genes and in improved diagnosis of rare paediatric disease. Importantly, for affected families, a better understanding of the genetic basis of rare disease translates to more accurate prognosis, management, surveillance and genetic advice; stimulates research into new therapies; and enables provision of better support.

Indexed as

Genetic Predisposition to DiseaseGenetic VariationGenome, HumanRare DiseasesAdolescentChildChild, PreschoolFemaleGenome-Wide Association StudyGenomicsHumansInfantInfant, NewbornMale

Identifiers

PMID29398702

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.