ReviewCurrent cardiology reports2018
Large-Scale Genomic Biobanks and Cardiovascular Disease.
Review in Current cardiology reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Molecular Pathology of Cardiomyopathies: Bridging Morphology, Genomics, and Clinical Phenotypes.Current issues in molecular biology · 2026Review
- Biobanks in chronic disease management: A comprehensive review of strategies, challenges, and future directions.Heliyon · 2024Review
- Increase in power by obtaining 10 or more controls per case when type-1 error is small in large-scale association studies.BMC medical research methodology · 2023Article
- What can we learn from common variants associated with unexpected phenotypes in rare genetic diseases?Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2021Article
- Sport and exercise genomics: the FIMS 2019 consensus statement update.British journal of sports medicine · 2020Article
- Attitudes of publics who are unwilling to donate DNA data for research.European journal of medical genetics · 2019Article
- Genome-Wide Association Studies of Coronary Artery Disease: Recent Progress and Challenges Ahead.Current atherosclerosis reports · 2018Review
- Genomic Screening: The Mutation and the Mustard Seed.The Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewCardiovascular disease is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide and is the focus of extensive biomedical research. Large genetic consortia combining data from many traditional prospective cohort and ascertained case-control study designs have facilitated the discovery of genetic associations for a variety of cardiovascular diseases including diabetes, coronary artery disease, and hypertension. Biobank-based genetic studies offer an alternative whereby large populations are genotyped and linked to electronic health records. RECENT
findingsBiobank sample sizes worldwide have surpassed even the largest genetic consortia and have yielded key insights into the genetic determinants of both common and rare cardiovascular phenotypes. Herein, we provide an overview of the largest genomic biobanks and discuss the relevant advantages and challenges inherent to the biobank model of cohort generation and genomic study design.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29520520What 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.