ArticleClinical and experimental pediatrics2026
Clinical application of whole exome and genome sequencing in pediatric neurodevelopmental disorders.
Article in Clinical and experimental pediatrics, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNeurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs) are frequently encountered in pediatric neurology clinics. However, their extensive genetic heterogeneity often limits the diagnostic yield of standard diagnostic tests, highlighting the need for comprehensive genomic approaches. PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic utility of whole exome sequencing (WES) and whole genome sequencing (WGS) in children with unexplained NDDs and assess the clinical relevance of the genomic findings.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 64 pediatric patients with NDDs who underwent WES or WGS between March 2018 and November 2024. Clinical data, neuroimaging and electroencephalography findings, and the results of previous genetic tests were analyzed. The diagnostic yield was calculated, and clinical characteristics were compared between patients with and without a genetically confirmed diagnosis. Patients were categorized as genetically confirmed (positive) when a definitive molecular diagnosis was identified through WES or WGS and as not genetically confirmed (negative) when no causative variant was detected.
resultsA definitive molecular diagnosis was achieved in 25 of 64 patients (39.1%). Diagnostic yields were 37.5% and 33.3% for WES and WGS, respectively. Most variants showed autosomal dominant (n=13) inheritance, followed by X-linked (n=9) and autosomal recessive (n=3) patterns. Novel variants accounted for 57.7% of the pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants. A positive family history was significantly associated with a higher diagnostic yield (20.0% vs. 2.6%, P=0.030), while prematurity was more common in the negative group (33.3% vs. 8.0%, P=0.032). Three WES-negative patients were later diagnosed using chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) or repeat expansion testing.
conclusionWES and WGS are effective diagnostic tools for pediatric NDDs. Phenotype re-evaluation and the selective use of genetic tests such as CMA and repeat expansion analysis enhance diagnostic yield.
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.