ReviewHematology. American Society of Hematology. Education Program2020
Improving interpretation of genetic testing for hereditary hemorrhagic, thrombotic, and platelet disorders.
Review in Hematology. American Society of Hematology. Education Program, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Biomarkers of Coagulation Disorders-Where to from Here?Biomolecules · 2026Review
- Molecular diagnosis of inherited platelet disorders: a tale of two realities - advanced vs. resource-limited setting.Thrombosis journal · 2025Review
- How genetic advances are being translated into improved diagnostic outcomes for patients with inherited bleeding disorders.Blood vessels, thrombosis & hemostasis · 2025Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The last 10 years have seen an explosion in the amount of data available through next-generation sequencing. These data are advancing quickly, and this pace makes it difficult for most practitioners to easily keep up with all of the new information. Complicating this understanding is sometimes conflicting information about variant pathogenicity or even about the role of some genes in the pathogenesis of disease. The more widespread clinical use of sequencing has expanded phenotypes, including the identification of mild phenotypes associated with previously serious disease, such as with some variants in RUNX1, MYH9, ITG2A, and others. Several organizations have taken up the task of cataloging and systematically evaluating genes and variants using a standardized approach and making the data publicly available so that others can benefit from their gene/variant curation. The efforts in testing for hereditary hemorrhagic, thrombotic, and platelet disorders have been led by the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis Scientific Standardization Committee on Genomics in Thrombosis and Hemostasis, the American Society of Hematology, and the National Institutes of Health National Human Genome Research Institute Clinical Genome Resource. This article outlines current efforts to improve the interpretation of genetic testing and the role of standardizing and disseminating information. By assessing the strength of gene-disease associations, standardizing variant curation guidelines, sharing genomic data among expert members, and incorporating data from existing disease databases, the number of variants of uncertain significance will decrease, thereby improving the value of genetic testing as a diagnostic tool.
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.