Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29666641›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of endocrinology2018

Brief Overview of a Decade of Genome-Wide Association Studies on Primary Hypertension.

Afifah Binti Azam, Elena Aisha Binti Azizan

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of endocrinology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Heliyon · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Afifah Binti AzamDepartment of Medicine, The National University of Malaysia Medical Centre, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.ORCID 0000-0003-0284-2132
Elena Aisha Binti AzizanDepartment of Medicine, The National University of Malaysia Medical Centre, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.ORCID 0000-0002-5549-4242
University Kebangsaan Malaysia Medical Centre · MY

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Primary hypertension is widely believed to be a complex polygenic disorder with the manifestation influenced by the interactions of genomic and environmental factors making identification of susceptibility genes a major challenge. With major advancement in high-throughput genotyping technology, genome-wide association study (GWAS) has become a powerful tool for researchers studying genetically complex diseases. GWASs work through revealing links between DNA sequence variation and a disease or trait with biomedical importance. The human genome is a very long DNA sequence which consists of billions of nucleotides arranged in a unique way. A single base-pair change in the DNA sequence is known as a single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP). With the help of modern genotyping techniques such as chip-based genotyping arrays, thousands of SNPs can be genotyped easily. Large-scale GWASs, in which more than half a million of common SNPs are genotyped and analyzed for disease association in hundreds of thousands of cases and controls, have been broadly successful in identifying SNPs associated with heart diseases, diabetes, autoimmune diseases, and psychiatric disorders. It is however still debatable whether GWAS is the best approach for hypertension. The following is a brief overview on the outcomes of a decade of GWASs on primary hypertension.

Identifiers

PMID29666641
PMCPMC5831899
OpenAlexW2788730786

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.