ReviewAmerican journal of human genetics2025
Increasing the genomic workforce through research capacity building: Designing evaluation plans for maximum impact.
Review in American journal of human genetics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Contextualizing Evaluation in Research Consortia: A Reflective Case Study from the Research Centers in Minority Institutions (RCMIs) Program.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Article
- The Case for Genomic Surveillance in Africa.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
More interventions are needed to address the need for workforce diversity and research capacity building (RCB) in genomics. In 2023, the National Human Genome Research Institute and the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities of the National Institutes of Health funded the Diversity Centers for Genome Research Consortium to address this critical gap. The NIH program staff designed a prospective evaluation plan and developed common data elements (CDEs) that capture common evaluation outputs, synergize and streamline reporting, and facilitate continuous quality improvement. We created five CDEs: genomics programs and equipment, scientific productivity, scientific collaboration, community engagement, and workforce development. The prospective development of an evaluation plan based on CDEs facilitates the ongoing evaluation, reporting, and adjustment of RCB interventions to enhance the diversity of the genomics workforce.
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.