ArticleFrontiers in genetics2022
Functional Evaluation and Genetic Landscape of Children and Young Adults Referred for Assessment of Bronchiectasis.
Article in Frontiers in genetics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Translating transcriptomics analysis into diagnostic workflows: clinical variant identification and interpretation in hypothesis-driven and hypothesis-free approaches.EBioMedicine · 2026Article
- Prenatal genetic diagnosis of fetuses with dextrocardia using whole exome sequencing in a tertiary center.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bronchiectasis is the abnormal dilation of the airway which may be caused by various etiologies in children. Beyond the more recognized cause of bacterial and viral infections and primary immunodeficiencies, other genetic conditions such as cystic fibrosis and primary ciliary dyskinesia (PCD) can also contribute to the disease. Currently, there is still debate on whether genome sequencing (GS) or exome sequencing reanalysis (rES) would be beneficial if the initial targeted testing results returned negative. This study aims to provide a back-to-back comparison between rES and GS to explore the best integrated approach for the functional and genetics evaluation for patients referred for assessment of bronchiectasis. In phase 1, an initial 60 patients were analyzed by exome sequencing (ES) with one additional individual recruited later as an affected sibling for ES. Functional evaluation of the nasal nitric oxide test, transmission electron microscopy, and high-speed video microscopy were also conducted when possible. In phase 2, GS was performed on 30 selected cases with trio samples available. To provide a back-to-back comparison, two teams of genome analysts were alternatively allocated to GS or rES and were blinded to each other's analysis. The time for bioinformatics, analysis, and diagnostic utility was recorded for evaluation. ES revealed five positive diagnoses (5/60, 8.3%) in phase 1, and four additional diagnoses were made by rES and GS (4/30, 13%) during phase 2. Subsequently, one additional positive diagnosis was identified in a sibling by ES and an overall diagnostic yield of 10/61 (16.4%) was reached. Among those patients with a clinical suspicion of PCD (n = 31/61), the diagnostic yield was 26% (
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.