Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34211152›Full record

ArticleGenetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics2021

Exome and genome sequencing for pediatric patients with congenital anomalies or intellectual disability: an evidence-based clinical guideline of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG).

Kandamurugu Manickam, Monica R McClain, Laurie A Demmer, Sawona Biswas, Hutton M Kearney, Jennifer Malinowski, Lauren J Massingham, Danny Miller, Timothy W Yu, Fuki M Hisama and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 335 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
335citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

335 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Identification of biallelic loss-of-functionJournal of medical genetics · 2026
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Long-read sequencing for neurological disorders: opportunities, challenges, and future directions.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026
    Review
  20. Article

275 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

11 authors.

Kandamurugu ManickamDivision of Genetic and Genomic Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, OH, USA.
Monica R McClainScientific and Strategic Affairs, Evidera | PPD, Waltham, MA, USA.
Laurie A DemmerDivision of Medical Genetics, Department of Pediatrics, Atrium Health's Levine Children's Hospital, Charlotte, NC, USA.
Sawona BiswasDivision of Adult Genetics, Department of Pathology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Hutton M KearneyDivision of Laboratory Genetics and Genomics, Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Jennifer MalinowskiWrite Inscite, LLC, South Salem, NY, USA.
Lauren J MassinghamDivision of Medical Genetics, Department of Pediatrics, Hasbro Children's Hospital, Providence, RI, USA.
Danny MillerMEPAN Foundation, Corte Madera, CA, USA.
Timothy W YuDivision of Genetics and Genomics, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Fuki M HisamaDivision of Medical Genetics, Department of Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA.
ACMG Board of Directors

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo develop an evidence-based clinical practice guideline for the use of exome and genome sequencing (ES/GS) in the care of pediatric patients with one or more congenital anomalies (CA) with onset prior to age 1 year or developmental delay (DD) or intellectual disability (ID) with onset prior to age 18 years.

methodsThe Pediatric Exome/Genome Sequencing Evidence-Based Guideline Work Group (n = 10) used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) evidence to decision (EtD) framework based on the recent American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) systematic review, and an Ontario Health Technology Assessment to develop and present evidence summaries and health-care recommendations. The document underwent extensive internal and external peer review, and public comment, before approval by the ACMG Board of Directors.

resultsThe literature supports the clinical utility and desirable effects of ES/GS on active and long-term clinical management of patients with CA/DD/ID, and on family-focused and reproductive outcomes with relatively few harms. Compared with standard genetic testing, ES/GS has a higher diagnostic yield and may be more cost-effective when ordered early in the diagnostic evaluation.

conclusionWe strongly recommend that ES/GS be considered as a first- or second-tier test for patients with CA/DD/ID.

Indexed as

Genetics, MedicalIntellectual DisabilityChildExomeExome SequencingGenomicsHumansInfantPractice Guidelines as TopicUnited States

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.