ArticleAmerican journal of medical genetics. Part A2025
Prevalence of Individuals With Multiple Diagnosed Genetic Diseases in the Undiagnosed Diseases Network.
Article in American journal of medical genetics. Part A, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- The long road to diagnosis: recessive PMPCB deficiency hidden behind a dominant familial VCP defect.Molecular genetics and metabolism reports · 2026Article
- "We've done our due diligence": Experiences of reproductive genetic carrier screening in people with experiential knowledge of a genetic condition.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- Consequences of genomic literacy elements on genetic testing decisions among Emirati adults: a cross-sectional study.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Completely resolved structural variants by optical genome mapping with adaptive sampling from CNV discovery.NPJ genomic medicine · 2026Article
- The Undiagnosed Diseases Network (UDN) Solves Ocular Syndromic Diagnostic Dilemmas.American journal of ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Abnormal Splicing in the Final Intron of PRX Results in Dominant Congenital Cataract Without Neurological Phenotype.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2025Article
- A genome-wide approach for the discovery of novel repeat expansion disorders in the Undiagnosed Diseases Network cohort.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Report the prevalence of multiple genetic diseases in the Undiagnosed Diseases Network (UDN) cohort in the post-exome-sequencing era. UDN subjects underwent genome sequencing before inclusion in the cohort. Records of all UDN subjects until January 2024 were analyzed. The number of diagnoses, proportion of molecular versus nonmolecular (i.e., not attributable to a discretely identifiable genetic change) diagnoses, and the inheritance patterns of the genetic diagnoses were determined. Of 2799 subjects, 766 (27.4%) had diagnoses. Of these 766, 95.4% had one diagnosis, 4.0% had two diagnoses, and 0.5% had three diagnoses. Of the diagnosed subjects, 93.4% had a genetic disease, and 6.5% had a nonmolecular disease. Of subjects with two diagnoses, both diagnoses were molecular in 90.3%, while 9.7% had one molecular and one nonmolecular diagnosis. All four subjects with three diagnoses had three molecular diagnoses. 4.2% of diagnosed subjects in the UDN had more than one molecular diagnosis, with four individuals having three concurrent Mendelian diagnoses. Additionally, three subjects had concurrent molecular and nonmolecular diagnoses. Given that numerous UDN subjects had a negative genome sequence prior to UDN enrollment, multiple molecular diagnoses may contribute to diagnostic uncertainty even with genome sequencing, as may concurrent nonmolecular disease.
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.