ArticleThe Hastings Center report2023
The Pitfalls of Genomic Data Diversity.
Article in The Hastings Center report, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ethical Priorities Among Commercial Genomics Professionals : Survey Evidence Highlighting Diversity, Fragmented Privacy Law, and Human Rights Risks as Central Participant Concerns.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2026Article
- Dissecting the Predictive Accuracy of Polygenic Indexes for Behavioral Phenotypes Across Genetic Ancestries.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- When genomics companies act as biobanks: governance challenges in an era of genomic assetization.Frontiers in genetics · 2026Article
- Dissecting the Predictive Accuracy of Polygenic Indexes for Behavioral Phenotypes Across Genetic Ancestries.Research square · 2025Article
- The All of Us Research Program's Social Media Outreach to Underrepresented Populations: Mixed Methods Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Ethno-racial categorisations for biomedical studies: the fair selection of research participants and population stratification.Synthese · 2024Article
- Placing Publics in Public Health Genomics.Public health genomics · 2024Article
- The Pitfalls of Genomic Data Diversity.The Hastings Center report · 2023Article
- Misaligned Expectations: Motivations of Medically Underserved People to Enroll in the All of Us Research Program.Ethics & human researchArticle
- Spotlighting Structural Constraints on Decisions About Participation in Genomic and Precision Medicine.AJOB empirical bioethicsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Biomedical research recruitment today focuses on including participants representative of global genetic variation-rightfully so. But ethnographic attention to practices of inclusion highlights how this agenda often transforms into "predatory inclusion," simplistic pushes to get Black and brown people into genomic databases. As anthropologists of medicine, we argue that the question of how to get from diverse data to concrete benefit for people who are marginalized cannot be presumed to work itself out as a byproduct of diverse datasets. To actualize the equitable translation of genomics, practitioners need to place the impacts of ancestral genetic difference in the scope of much more impactful social determinants. For this to happen, multidisciplinary expertise needs to be leveraged, and current, structurally unequal health care systems ultimately need to transform. As modest steps toward this goal, new models for benefit-sharing must be developed and implemented to mitigate existing inequality between data donors and the entities profiting from that data.
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.