Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29765282›Full record

ArticleEJIFCC2018

Next-generation sequencing approach for the diagnosis of human diseases: open challenges and new opportunities.

Chiara Di Resta, Silvia Galbiati, Paola Carrera, Maurizio Ferrari

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EJIFCC, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 74 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
74citing 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

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

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Identification and characterization ofClinical case reports · 2024
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review

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

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

4 authors.

Chiara Di RestaVita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy.
Silvia GalbiatiGenomic Unit for the Diagnosis of Human Disorders, Division of Genetics and Cell Biology, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy.
Paola CarreraGenomic Unit for the Diagnosis of Human Disorders, Division of Genetics and Cell Biology, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy.
Maurizio FerrariVita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The rapid evolution and widespread use of next generation sequencing (NGS) in clinical laboratories has allowed an incredible progress in the genetic diagnostics of several inherited disorders. However, the new technologies have brought new challenges. In this review we consider the important issue of NGS data analysis, as well as the interpretation of unknown genetic variants and the management of the incidental findings. Moreover, we focus the attention on the new professional figure of bioinformatics and the new role of medical geneticists in clinical management of patients. Furthermore, we consider some of the main clinical applications of NGS, taking into consideration that there will be a growing progress in this field in the forthcoming future.

Indexed as

causative mutationscoveragediagnosticsgenetic medicinegeneticsincidental findingsinherited disordersnext generation sequencingsequence depthvariants interpretation

Identifiers

PMID29765282
PMCPMC5949614

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.