Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39917177›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in genetics2024

Genetic ancestry and the colonial legacies of race in genomics: a cross-disciplinary dialogue.

Ernesto Schwartz-Marin, Tayyaba Jiwani, Sarah Abel, Yulia Egorova, Amade M'charek, Diogo Meyer, Andrés Moreno Estrada, Katharina Schramm, Peter Wade, Michel Naslavsky

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review 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 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Decolonising forensic odontology in Sub-Saharan Africa.Forensic science international. Synergy · 2025
    Review
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

10 authors.

Ernesto Schwartz-MarinDepartment of Sociology, Philosophy, and Anthropology, University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom.
Tayyaba JiwaniDepartment of Sociology, Philosophy, and Anthropology, University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom.
Sarah AbelInstitute for Philosophical Research, National Autonomous University of Mexico, Mexico City, Mexico.
Yulia EgorovaDepartment of Anthropology, University of Durham, Durham, United Kingdom.
Amade M'charekDepartment of Anthropology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Diogo MeyerDepartment of Genetics and Evolutionary Biology, Institute of Biosciences, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Andrés Moreno EstradaAdvanced Genomics Unit, Center for Research and Advanced Studies (Cinvestav), Mexico City, Mexico.
Katharina SchrammFaculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Bayreuth, Bayreuth, Germany.
Peter WadeDepartment of Social Anthropology, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Michel NaslavskyDepartment of Genetics and Evolutionary Biology, Biosciences Institute of the University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As genomics initiatives have spread around the world-often in the name of genetic diversity and inclusion-they have not only invoked promises of a medical revolution, but also revived categories of human difference that resemble erstwhile racial classifications. This is despite the fact that geneticists broadly dismissed racial categories as obsolete and unfounded after the Human Genome Project was completed in 2003. In fact, contemporary genomics initiatives have often ended up reinforcing ethnocentric and nativist conceptions of difference, drawing intense criticism from activists and critical social scientists. This roundtable brings leading population geneticists grappling with the question of genetic identity and ancestry, especially in the global South, together with some of the most prominent scholars of race in genomics. The result is an engaging and insightful dialogue on questions that have vexed the field for decades. How do we-indeed "can" we reconcile the boundaries of biological and social difference? How do notions of "genetic ancestry" and "biogeographical ancestry differ from erstwhile racial and ethnic categories? Can racial categories ever be shorn of their colonial and oppressive legacies? Here we scrutinise the methodological and epistemological frameworks in contemporary genomics that work to define populations and shape our understanding of biology, society, health, and disease. We seek to clarify perspectives across the disciplinary divide, and to advance constructive and grounded critiques that contend with the question of justice in genomics.

Indexed as

decolonialgenetic ancestryhetero-identificationpopulation samplingraceracializationsovereignty

Identifiers

PMID39917177
PMCPMC11799264

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.