Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42162269›Full record

ReviewEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2026

Systematic mapping of rare genetic disease studies using UK primary care electronic health records.

Thomas E B Wright, Hannah Slevin, Sinéad Magnier, Matthew J Carr, Shruti Garg, Roger T Webb, Darren M Ashcroft, Siddharth Banka

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Thomas E B WrightDivision of Psychology and Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine, and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. Thomas.Wright-11@postgrad.manchester.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-3056-2621
Hannah SlevinNational Institute for Health and Care Research Manchester Biomedical Research Centre, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust and University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID 0009-0008-0416-5319
Sinéad MagnierNational Institute for Health and Care Research Manchester Biomedical Research Centre, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust and University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Matthew J CarrNational Institute for Health and Care Research Manchester Biomedical Research Centre, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust and University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7336-1606
Shruti GargDivision of Psychology and Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine, and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4472-4583
Roger T WebbDivision of Psychology and Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine, and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8532-2647
Darren M AshcroftNational Institute for Health and Care Research Manchester Biomedical Research Centre, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust and University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2958-915X
Siddharth BankaManchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, St Mary's Hospital, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK. Siddharth.Banka@manchester.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-8527-2210

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rare disease studies often rely on small, selected cohorts, are resource-intensive and difficult to scale. UK primary care electronic health record (EHR) databases provide population-based, longitudinal data, but their use for rare genetic disease research has not been systematically examined. Through systematic mapping of publications from five UK primary care EHR databases (CPRD, OPCRD, QResearch, SAIL Databank and THIN), we found that only 0.82% (47 of 5754) of studies reported on rare genetic diseases. Of these, 77% (36 of 47) linked to external datasets. Study designs included case-control, cross-sectional and cohort studies. Cohort designs predominated, often with individual-level matched comparators. Case ascertainment was primarily based on routinely recorded diagnostic codes. Most studies examined a single disease, collectively encompassing 23 conditions. There was a skew towards multisystem, neurological, autosomal dominant and single-gene disorders, with relatively higher population frequencies and therapeutic tractability. Rare disease sample sizes ranged from 21 to 5059 (median 392). Important insights were revealed into phenotypic variation, phenotype expansion, complications and management outcomes, including findings not readily identifiable in traditional studies. Examples include higher prevalence of hereditary haemorrhagic telangiectasia in females, consistent with sex-modified phenotypic expression; non-skeletal complications and premature mortality in X-linked hypophosphataemia; and elevated malignancy risk in myotonic dystrophy type 1 with type 2 diabetes, potentially attenuated by metformin. In conclusion, UK primary care EHR databases are markedly underutilised for rare genetic diseases. For many conditions, limited availability of diagnostic codes is a constraint. However, their demonstrated capacity, scale, scope and population representativeness support wider use.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsGenetic Diseases, InbornPrimary Health CareRare DiseasesHumansUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID42162269
PMCPMC13341784

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.