Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31848469›Full record

ArticleGenetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics2020

Clinical utility of genetic testing in 201 preschool children with inherited eye disorders.

Eva Lenassi, Jill Clayton-Smith, Sofia Douzgou, Simon C Ramsden, Stuart Ingram, Georgina Hall, Claire L Hardcastle, Tracy A Fletcher, Rachel L Taylor, Jamie M Ellingford and 8 more

Erratum issuedOpen access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 33 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 62 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. A Practical Guide to Genetic Eye Conditions for Paediatricians.Journal of paediatrics and child health · 2025
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Through theGenes · 2024
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Eva LenassiDivision of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicines and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Jill Clayton-SmithDivision of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicines and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Sofia DouzgouDivision of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicines and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Simon C RamsdenDivision of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicines and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Stuart IngramManchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, Saint Mary's Hospital, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
Georgina HallDivision of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicines and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Claire L HardcastleManchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, Saint Mary's Hospital, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
Tracy A FletcherManchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, Saint Mary's Hospital, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
Rachel L TaylorDivision of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicines and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Jamie M EllingfordDivision of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicines and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
William D NewmanManchester Royal Eye Hospital, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
Cecilia FenertyDivision of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicines and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Vinod SharmaManchester Royal Eye Hospital, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
I Chris LloydDivision of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicines and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Susmito BiswasDivision of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicines and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Jane L AshworthDivision of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicines and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Graeme C BlackDivision of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicines and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. graeme.black@manchester.ac.uk.
Panagiotis I SergouniotisDivision of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicines and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. panagiotis.sergouniotis@manchester.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0986-4123
University of Manchester · GBManchester Royal Eye Hospital · GBManchester University NHS Foundation Trust · GBGreat Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust · GBManchester Academic Health Science Centre · GB

Funding

Department of Health CL-2017-06-001Medical Research Council MR/R024952/1Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 200990/Z/16/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeA key property to consider in all genetic tests is clinical utility, the ability of the test to influence patient management and health outcomes. Here we assess the current clinical utility of genetic testing in diverse pediatric inherited eye disorders (IEDs).

methodsTwo hundred one unrelated children (0-5 years old) with IEDs were ascertained through the database of the North West Genomic Laboratory Hub, Manchester, UK. The cohort was collected over a 7-year period (2011-2018) and included 74 children with bilateral cataracts, 8 with bilateral ectopia lentis, 28 with bilateral anterior segment dysgenesis, 32 with albinism, and 59 with inherited retinal disorders. All participants underwent panel-based genetic testing.

resultsThe diagnostic yield of genetic testing for the cohort was 64% (ranging from 39% to 91% depending on the condition). The test result led to altered management (including preventing additional investigations or resulting in the introduction of personalized surveillance measures) in 33% of probands (75% for ectopia lentis, 50% for cataracts, 33% for inherited retinal disorders, 7% for anterior segment dysgenesis, 3% for albinism).

conclusionGenetic testing helped identify an etiological diagnosis in the majority of preschool children with IEDs. This prevented additional unnecessary testing and provided the opportunity for anticipatory guidance in significant subsets of patients.

Indexed as

CataractEye AbnormalitiesGenetic TestingRetinal DiseasesChild, PreschoolEyeHumansInfantInfant, Newbornalbinismclinical utilitycongenital cataractinherited eye diseaseinherited retinal disease

Identifiers

PMID31848469
PMCPMC7118019
OpenAlexW2995557939

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.