ArticleThe Yale journal of biology and medicine2022
Targeting Representation: Interpreting Calls for Diversity in Precision Medicine Research.
Article in The Yale journal of biology and medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diversity-in-a-dish: A practical framework for hiPSC model development.Stem cell reports · 2026Review
- Bias-Mitigated AI as a Foundation for Resilient and Effective Health Systems.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2026Article
- Biobanking knowledge and donation willingness among musculoskeletal patients in England: a multisite cross-sectional study.BMJ open · 2026Article
- Race and "omic" data in glioma: A systematic review of contemporary research to explore the digital divide.Neuro-oncology practice · 2025Article
- Creation and Characterization of a Breast Cancer Tissue Microarray Including Black and White Patients from Florida and Hispanic Patients from Puerto Rico and Florida.Cancer research communications · 2025Article
- Bridging genomics' greatest challenge: The diversity gap.Cell genomics · 2025Review
- A qualitative study of diversity in precision medicine research: The development and stakeholder assessment of a Diversity Decision Map.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2025Article
- Exploring the Influence of BMI on Gait Metrics: A Comprehensive Analysis of Spatiotemporal Parameters and Stability Indicators.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Observational
- Overcoming barriers to single-cell RNA sequencing adoption in low- and middle-income countries.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Scientists have identified a "diversity gap" in genetic samples and health data, which have been drawn predominantly from individuals of European ancestry, as posing an existential threat to the promise of precision medicine. Inadequate inclusion as articulated by scientists, policymakers, and ethicists has prompted large-scale initiatives aimed at recruiting populations historically underrepresented in biomedical research. Despite explicit calls to increase diversity, the meaning of diversity - which dimensions matter for what outcomes and why - remain strikingly imprecise. Drawing on our document review and qualitative data from observations and interviews of funders and research teams involved in five precision medicine research (PMR) projects, we note that calls for increasing diversity often focus on "representation" as the goal of recruitment. The language of representation is used flexibly to refer to two objectives: achieving sufficient genetic variation across populations and including historically disenfranchised groups in research. We argue that these dual understandings of representation are more than rhetorical slippage, but rather allow for the contemporary collection of samples and data from marginalized populations to stand in as correcting historical exclusion of social groups towards addressing health inequity. We trace the unresolved historical debates over how and to what extent researchers should procure diversity in PMR and how they contributed to ongoing uncertainty about what axes of diversity matter and why. We argue that ambiguity in the meaning of representation at the outset of a study contributes to a lack of clear conceptualization of diversity downstream throughout subsequent phases of the study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
36187415PMC9511949W4300690058What 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.