ArticleHarvard journal of law & technology2024
The Legal Uncertainties of Sociogenomic Polygenic Scores.
Article in Harvard journal of law & technology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Distinguishing social and medical traits: perspectives of scientists using polygenic scores.Journal of community genetics · 2026Article
- Principles and Policy Recommendations for Comprehensive Genetic Data Governance.Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society · 2025Article
- Scanning the Horizon of Sociogenomics: an Assessment of the Development and Growth of Polygenic Indices for Social and Behavioral Traits.AJOB empirical bioethicsReview
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
Genomics may increasingly be used to predict associations with social traits through a new field called sociogenomics. This approach includes developing genetic 'scores' to identify associations with individuals' traits like educational attainment, feelings of loneliness, aggressive behavior, and criminality. Companies are already testing embryos to select for some of these traits, and these scores could be adopted by industries and settings beyond commercialized reproductive genetic testing services. The nature of the scores raises concerns about the potential dangers of a passive regulatory approach. Although supporters argue that sociogenomic polygenic scores could help mediate social inequality, there are worries that their implementation into society could be discriminatory and inequitable. Without adequate safeguards, it could have severe consequences for adults using IVF services, students, health insurance beneficiaries, employees, and others in the future. While existing legal structures are in place to regulate medical genetic information, these protections have their own flaws, and further, do not clearly extend to polygenic scores. Policymakers must therefore consider the potential harms of sociogenomic polygenic scores, and how to maximize any benefits.
Identifiers
40365376PMC12074663What 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.