ArticleJournal of inherited metabolic disease2026
An Optimized Diagnostic Approach for Adults With Suspected Inherited Metabolic Disorders.
Article in Journal of inherited metabolic disease, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- An Optimized Diagnostic Approach for Adults With Suspected Inherited Metabolic Disorders.Journal of inherited metabolic disease · 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Inherited metabolic disorders (IMDs) arise from defects in metabolic pathways essential for normal biochemical function. Although the pathogenic genetic variants are present at birth, clinical manifestations may not emerge until adolescence or adulthood. Symptoms may be more subtle compared to those of childhood onset IMDs and may have overlap with signs and symptoms of acquired disorders. This makes diagnosing IMDs in adulthood challenging. To identify how routine diagnostic care for adults suspected of having an IMD could be improved, we conducted a reanalysis study in a cohort of 31 adult participants. The participants, who remained undiagnosed after standard diagnostic care, were seen by a clinical geneticist, adult metabolic specialist and neurologist for deep phenotyping and data collection. Subsequently, exome sequencing data were reanalyzed and possible disease-causing variants were prioritized for further evaluation by a multidisciplinary team including both clinicians and geneticists (biochemical and molecular). This approach led to a (partial) diagnosis for nine participants from six families, giving a 25% diagnostic yield. We could distinguish four possible reasons why the identified disease-associated variants were not detected during routine diagnostic care. Beyond the expected impact of technical advancements and emerging knowledge of disease genes, we found that the most impactful factor was of organizational nature. Our findings underscore the value of reviewing all strong genetic variants within a multidisciplinary team setting, facilitating a bidirectional exchange of expertise. This approach enhances diagnostic accuracy, particularly when the underlying cause of the disease is not immediately apparent.
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.