ReviewAmerican journal of human genetics2025
Data sharing in the PRIMED Consortium: Design, implementation, and recommendations for future policymaking.
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 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Incorporating polygenic risk scores and social determinants of health across populations: Considerations and best practices in research.American journal of human genetics · 2026Review
- The OurHealth Study: A digital genomic cohort for cardiometabolic risk mechanisms in US South Asians.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Review
- From fragmentation to federation: multi-partner OMOP implementation in Uganda enabling global real-world evidence generation.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Anonymization, accountability, and access: legal dimensions of health data sharing in federated networks. Perspectives from empirical study.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- A data model for population descriptors in genomic research.American journal of human genetics · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Sharing diverse genomic and other biomedical datasets is critical to advancing scientific discoveries and their equitable translation to improve human health. However, data sharing remains challenging in the context of legacy datasets, evolving policies, multi-institutional consortium science, and international stakeholders. The NIH-funded Polygenic Risk Methods in Diverse Populations (PRIMED) Consortium was established to improve the performance of polygenic risk estimates for a broad range of health and disease outcomes with global impacts. Improving polygenic risk score performance across genetically diverse populations requires access to large, diverse cohorts. We report on the design and implementation of data-sharing policies and procedures developed in PRIMED to aggregate and analyze data from multiple heterogeneous sources while adhering to pre-existing data-sharing policies for each integrated dataset and respecting participant preferences and informed consent. Specifically, we describe two primary data-sharing mechanisms-coordinated dbGaP applications and a Consortium Data Sharing Agreement-and provide alternatives when individual-level data cannot be shared within the Consortium (e.g., federated analyses). We also describe technical implementation of Consortium data sharing in the NHGRI Analysis Visualization and Informatics Lab-space (AnVIL) cloud platform to share derived individual-level data, genomic summary results, and methods workflows with appropriate permissions. As a consortium making secondary use of pre-existing data sources, we also discuss challenges and propose solutions for release of individual- and summary-level data products to the broader scientific community. We make recommendations for ongoing and future policymaking with the goal of informing future consortia and other research activities.
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.