ArticleClinical genetics2026
Non-Isolated Dandy-Walker Malformation: Exome Sequencing Efficacy and Phenotypic Expansions.
Article in Clinical genetics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dandy-Walker malformation (DWM) is a rare congenital abnormality of the posterior fossa and the cerebellum and has an incidence of 1 in 10 000 to 30 000 births. Although DWM can present in isolation, it is often associated with other central nervous system (CNS) abnormalities or extra-CNS anomalies (DWM+). A molecular cause is not identified in the majority of individuals with DWM+. This is due, in part, to uncertainty regarding optimal testing strategies and an incomplete understanding of the genetic causes of DWM+. In this study, we analyzed clinical exome sequencing (cES) data from 91 individuals with DWM+ to determine its diagnostic efficacy. A definitive or probable diagnosis was made for 32 individuals, yielding a diagnostic rate of 35.2% (32/91). Commercially available brain malformation panels would have detected only 24.2% (8/33) to 54.5% (18/33) of the diagnoses made by cES. We then used data from our cohort, published cases, and mouse models to identify nine phenotypic expansions involving DWM. Our results suggest that cES should be considered for all individuals with DWM+ for whom a molecular diagnosis has not been established and that additional testing to identify a genetic cause of DWM is likely not warranted in individuals with genetic syndromes caused by variants in ANKRD11, C2CD3, COL4A1, KMT2D, KRAS, OPHN1, SHOC2, SMARCB1, and WDR73.
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.