ArticleClinical genetics2026
Expanding Access to Genome Sequencing: Higher Diagnostic Yield in Self-Referred Participants From the CincyKidsSeq Study and Implications for Hybrid Models of Genetic Service Delivery.
Article in Clinical genetics, 2026. 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.
- Genotypic and phenotypic spectrum of hereditary spastic paraplegia 56: insights from novel CYP2U1 variants and a literature review.BMC neurology · 2026Review
- Expanding Access to Genome Sequencing: Higher Diagnostic Yield in Self-Referred Participants From the CincyKidsSeq Study and Implications for Hybrid Models of Genetic Service Delivery.Clinical genetics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Genome sequencing (GS) has emerged as the gold standard for diagnosing patients with rare diseases. As with many emerging technologies, equitable access remains a concern. To evaluate the feasibility and diagnostic impact of expanding access to GS, we report our experience implementing CincyKidsSeq, a prospective study offering GS as a "proband-first" test. Participants of all ages with at least one symptom were referred by genetics or non-genetics healthcare providers, or alternatively, were self-referred from February 2024 to February 2025. This diverse referral structure was evaluated for diagnostic yield while maintaining clinical oversight through a hybrid model in which reportable variants are delivered through genetic providers. The overall diagnostic yield of GS on 313 participants was 22% in the unstratified cohort. Self-referred patients had a higher diagnostic yield (11/33; 33%), compared with patients referred by a non-genetics provider (27/98; 27%), or genetics provider (32/182; 18%). Self-referred individuals were older, more likely to be female, frequently test-naïve, and utilized fewer human phenotype ontology (HPO) terms (p value = 0.0016). Self-referral may serve as an effective and complementary pathway for improving access to GS. Empowering families to initiate GS may be a reasonable pathway for an alternative model for genetic service delivery.
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.