ReviewCell genomics2026
Agentic genomics: From pipeline automation to autonomous validation.
Review in Cell genomics, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Genomics has entered a phase in which AI agents can autonomously discover, configure, execute, and chain bioinformatics operations from natural-language instructions. We term this paradigm "agentic genomics": the delegation of multi-step genomic analyses to autonomous software agents that select tools, manage dependencies, and adapt execution in response to intermediate results, mediated by large language models (LLMs) and constrained by domain-specific skill libraries. We argue that agentic genomics shifts the bottleneck in computational biology from pipeline construction to validation. We examine emerging systems, including CellAtria, AutoBA, Bio-Copilot, and ClawBio, and assess their divergent architectures. We propose a tiered validation framework spanning research-grade, benchmarked, and clinical-grade analyses and argue that equity-aware design must be a systems requirement rather than an optional aspiration. We identify the infrastructure needed to make agentic genomics trustworthy.
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.