ArticleAmerican journal of human genetics2026
Variant interpretation training for the genomics era: Learning outcomes to inform professional competencies and education.
Article in American journal of human genetics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The genomic era of "idiopathic" male infertility: why comprehensive andrological evaluation matters more than ever.Journal of assisted reproduction and 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
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Genomic medicine is increasingly being integrated into healthcare systems worldwide, requiring a skilled genomic workforce. Variant interpretation (VI) is crucial to genomic testing, yet there are no agreed professional competencies in VI, career pathways are ill-defined for some professions, and there is limited literature on educational needs and programs. We referenced education theory and curricula from nascent local VI training activities to co-develop learning outcomes in VI with content experts that informed scalable continuing education activities, evaluated using longitudinal cross-sectional surveys. We defined 16 learning outcomes in VI covering fundamental genetics and bioinformatics theory and the stages of variant identification, curation, and classification. The education program included options for self-directed online learning or blended learning (online pre-reading plus workshops). Program reach was 951 individuals (49.2% scientists and 27.8% clinicians). At completion, the majority reported increased understanding of learning outcomes (96.1%, 171/178) and increased confidence in the processes of VI (93.3%, 166/178). The majority (91.7%, 231/252) indicated that the learnings would impact their professional role. Our education program was effective at developing entry-level proficiency in VI across different professions. The learning outcomes can inform multiple aspects of VI education and training programs, including defining the desired level of mastery and program content and aligning evaluation measures. They also provide a basis for an educational framework to inform competencies in VI across multiple professions and for career benchmarking more broadly.
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.