Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40928819›Full record

ReviewJournal of medical screening2025

Assessment of the value of polygenic risk scores in the prevention of disease.

Aroon D Hingorani

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of medical screening, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Polygenic risk scores: en route to clinical practice.Medizinische Genetik : Mitteilungsblatt des Berufsverbandes Medizinische Genetik e.V · 2026
    Article
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

1 author.

Aroon D HingoraniInstitute of Cardiovascular Science, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8365-0081

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

It is claimed that polygenic risk scores will transform disease prevention, but a typical polygenic risk score for a common disease only detects 11% of affected individuals at a 5% false positive rate. This level of screening performance is not useful. Claims to the contrary are either due to incorrect interpretation of the data or other influences. Implementation of polygenic risk scores would divert resources from population-wide approaches that address the major disease burden in the average-risk majority to the follow-up of the many false positive results in those designated at high polygenic risk.

Indexed as

Genetic Predisposition to DiseaseGenetic TestingMultifactorial InheritanceGenetic Risk ScoreHumansRisk AssessmentRisk Factorsgenomicspolygenic risk scorePredictionrisk stratificationscreening

Identifiers

PMID40928819
PMCPMC12759097

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.