ArticleFrontiers in genetics2024
Typological thinking in human genomics research contributes to the production and prominence of scientific racism.
Article in Frontiers in genetics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- "Yet the Problem Remains": Why Genetic Determinism Still Haunts Biomedical Research.Bioethics · 2026Article
- Behavioural genetics must prioritize communication.Nature human behaviour · 2026Article
- P.A.D.D.L.E.: a hypothesis generation tool for assessing pollution's potential role in disease.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Patterns of brain-wide associations reflect socioeconomics.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Human Genome Diversity Project data use and implications for the governance of legacy genomic data.Nature genetics · 2025Article
- Power and Limitations of Inferring Genetic Ancestry.Annals of human genetics · 2025Review
- Responsible use of population neuroscience data: Towards standards of accountability and integrity.Developmental cognitive neuroscience · 2025Article
- "Precision Medicine" and the Failed Search for Binary Brain Sex Differences to Address Gender Behavioral Health Disparities.American journal of human biology : the official journal of the Human Biology Council · 2025Review
- The NHGRI-EBI GWAS Catalog: standards for reusability, sustainability and diversity.Nucleic acids research · 2025Article
- Race, intelligence and genetics: colonialism in the era of neurotechnology.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- The multi-scale complexity of human genetic variation beyond continental groups.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- The NHGRI-EBI GWAS Catalog: standards for reusability, sustainability and diversity.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- The methodological and ethical concerns of genetic studies of same-sex sexual behavior.American journal of human genetics · 2024Review
- The clinical, mechanistic, and social impacts of air pollution on atopic dermatitis.The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology · 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
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Public genomic datasets like the 1000 Genomes project (1KGP), Human Genome Diversity Project (HGDP), and the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) study are valuable public resources that facilitate scientific advancements in biology and enhance the scientific and economic impact of federally funded research projects. Regrettably, these datasets have often been developed and studied in ways that propagate outdated racialized and typological thinking, leading to fallacious reasoning among some readers that social and health disparities among the so-called races are due in part to innate biological differences between them. We highlight how this framing has set the stage for the racist exploitation of these datasets in two ways: First, we discuss the use of public biomedical datasets in studies that claim support for innate genetic differences in intelligence and other social outcomes between the groups identified as races. We further highlight recent instances of this which involve unauthorized access, use, and dissemination of public datasets. Second, we discuss the
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.