ReviewTrends in genetics : TIG2019
Genomic and Phenomic Research in the 21st Century.
Review in Trends in genetics : TIG, 2019. 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, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Examining genotype-phenotype associations of GRAM domain proteins using GWAS, PheWAS and literature review in cattle, human, pig, mouse and chicken.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Genetics.Cureus · 2024Review
- E-Pedigrees: a large-scale automatic family pedigree prediction application.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2021Article
- Great future or greedy venture: Precision medicine needs philosophy.Health science reports · 2021Review
- Review
- Genomics of Gulf War Illness in U.S. Veterans Who Served during the 1990-1991 Persian Gulf War: Methods and Rationale for Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study #2006.Brain sciences · 2021Article
- A web-based survey on various symptoms of computer vision syndrome and the genetic understanding based on a multi-trait genome-wide association study.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- The Genetics of Polycystic Ovary Syndrome: An Overview of Candidate Gene Systematic Reviews and Genome-Wide Association Studies.Journal of clinical medicine · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The field of human genomics has changed dramatically over time. Initial genomic studies were predominantly restricted to rare disorders in small families. Over the past decade, researchers changed course from family-based studies and instead focused on common diseases and traits in populations of unrelated individuals. With further advancements in biobanking, computer science, electronic health record (EHR) data, and more affordable high-throughput genomics, we are experiencing a new paradigm in human genomic research. Rapidly changing technologies and resources now make it possible to study thousands of diseases simultaneously at the genomic level. This review will focus on these advancements as scientists begin to incorporate phenome-wide strategies in human genomic research to understand the etiology of human diseases and develop new drugs to treat them.
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.