Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37670200›Full record

ReviewJournal of community genetics2023

Population diversity and equity in the genomic era: going global to return to the local.

Anahí Ruderman

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of community genetics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Atypical case of Rett syndrome with concurrentWorld journal of clinical pediatrics · 2025
    Article
  2. Egypt Genome: Towards an African new genomic era.Journal of advanced research · 2025
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
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

1 author.

Anahí RudermanPatagonian Institute of Social and Human Science. CONICET. Bv. Almirante Brown 2915, Puerto Madryn, Argentina. ruderman@cenpat-conicet.gob.ar.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9610-2997

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Advances in precision medicine depend on the quantity and quality of available genomic information. Various articles alert about the current disparities between the world's regions regarding the amount of genomic information available and the negative impact this will have on global health. The objective of this paper is to review these articles to describe what aspects they emphasize and highlight some issues that remain to be analyzed from the perspective of a "peripheral" country. Most of these articles come from central countries, where the need for more diversity in genomics is already detected. Several authors analyze lack of human diversity with focus on national, while others analyze the problem from a global perspective. Depending on the country of origin of the research, the claim for greater diversity has different meanings. Broadly, high-income countries advocate for better coverage looking within the boundaries of their own countries. In other regions of the world, where this field of research has not yet been massively developed, the same need for greater inclusiveness of origins in population genomics studies is not detected. An under-analyzed aspect is the unequal starting point between regions regarding the economic resources available for the development of this field of medicine, and for science and health in general. Although this macroeconomic and social aspect is usually absent in scientific analyses, without it solved, it will be impossible to guarantee that all world populations are equally represented in the panels or genomic databases that serve as input for precision medicine development.

Indexed as

Genomic and health disparitiesNational and global issuesPrecision medicine

Identifiers

PMID37670200
PMCPMC10725358

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.