ArticleNature2026
Harmonizing standards and resources for the medical genome.
Article in Nature, 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.
- Bridging precision agriculture and human medicine through comparative genetics.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2026Review
- Personalized reference genome-based pipeline reveals comprehensive haplotype-resolved views of cancer genomes.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 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
28 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Realizing the promise of precision medicine will require the highest standards of accuracy in genome sequencing and analysis. Here we describe challenges and opportunities for the field through the lens of genome data quality. We present recommendations in the context of specific areas of application for genomic sequencing in which isolated standards have arisen: germline sequencing, tumour sequencing, cell-free DNA testing, and sequencing for quality control in genetic therapy. Despite these distinct clinical contexts, technical challenges are often similar; for example, accurately detecting low-frequency genetic variants in tumour sequencing or gene-edited cells. We call for increased synchronization among these communities to establish new medical genome standards that promote confidence in genomic diagnostics and genetic therapies in a time of rapid technology-driven change. We suggest practical approaches for implementing these genome standards across contexts, and identify key areas that require further development.
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.