ArticleJournal of clinical and translational science2021
Addressing ethical and laboratory challenges for initiation of a rapid whole genome sequencing program.
Article in Journal of clinical and translational science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Evaluating visual imagery for participant understanding of research concepts in genomics research.Journal of community genetics · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Rapid whole genome sequencing (rapid WGS) is a powerful diagnostic tool that is becoming increasingly practical for widespread clinical use. However, protocols for its use are challenging to implement. A significant obstacle to clinical adoption is that laboratory certification requires an initial research development phase, which is constrained by regulations from returning results. Regulations preventing return of results have ethical implications in cases which might impact patient outcomes. Here, we describe our experience with the development of a rapid WGS research protocol, that balanced the requirements for laboratory-validated test development with the ethical needs of clinically relevant return of results.
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.