ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2018
Harmonizing Outcomes for Genomic Medicine: Comparison of eMERGE Outcomes to ClinGen Outcome/Intervention Pairs.
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- VN1K is a pangenome-informed multi-omics and phenomics resource for the Vietnamese population.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Advancing the science of genomic learning healthcare systems.Learning health systems · 2025Article
- Returning integrated genomic risk and clinical recommendations: The eMERGE study.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2023Article
- Do research participants share genomic screening results with family members?Journal of genetic counseling · 2022Article
- A RE-AIM Framework Analysis of DNA-Based Population Screening: Using Implementation Science to Translate Research Into Practice in a Healthcare System.Frontiers in genetics · 2022Article
- The Contribution of Pharmacogenetic Drug Interactions to 90-Day Hospital Readmissions: Preliminary Results from a Real-World Healthcare System.Journal of personalized medicine · 2021Article
- The Role of Electronic Health Records in Advancing Genomic Medicine.Annual review of genomics and human genetics · 2021Review
- Penetrance and outcomes at 1-year following return of actionable variants identified by genome sequencing.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2021Article
- DNA-based screening and population health: a points to consider statement for programs and sponsoring organizations from the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG).Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2021Article
- Lessons learned from the eMERGE Network: balancing genomics in discovery and practice.HGG advances · 2021Review
- Clinical utility of genomic sequencing: a measurement toolkit.NPJ genomic medicine · 2020Review
- Management of Secondary Genomic Findings.American journal of human genetics · 2020Review
- Building evidence and measuring clinical outcomes for genomic medicine.Lancet (London, England) · 2019Review
- The Genomic Medicine Integrative Research Framework: A Conceptual Framework for Conducting Genomic Medicine Research.American journal of human genetics · 2019Article
- Genomic Information for Clinicians in the Electronic Health Record: Lessons Learned From the Clinical Genome Resource Project and the Electronic Medical Records and Genomics Network.Frontiers in genetics · 2019Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors at 9 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Genomic medicine is moving from research to the clinic. There is a lack of evidence about the impact of genomic medicine interventions on health outcomes. This is due in part to a lack of standardized outcome measures that can be used across different programs to evaluate the impact of interventions targeted to specific genetic conditions. The eMERGE Outcomes working group (OWG) developed measures to collect information on outcomes following the return of genomic results to participants for several genetic disorders. These outcomes were compared to outcome intervention pairs for genetic disorders developed independently by the ClinGen Actionability working group (AWG). In general, there was concordance between the defined outcomes between the two groups. The ClinGen outcomes tended to be from a higher level and the AWG scored outcomes represented a subset of outcomes referenced in the accompanying AWG evidence review. eMERGE OWG outcomes were more detailed and discrete, facilitating a collection of relevant information from the health records. This paper demonstrates that common outcomes for genomic medicine interventions can be identified. Further work is needed to standardize outcomes across genomic medicine implementation projects and to make these publicly available to enhance dissemination and assist in making precision public health a reality.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.