ReviewEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2026
Health inequalities in precision medicine: A systematic review.
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.
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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Precision medicine aims to revolutionise healthcare by providing personalised treatments based on individual genetic variations. A systematic review was conducted to explore ethnic inequalities in precision medicine, focusing on representation of ethnic minorities or indigenous minority groups in the reporting of genomic research in any healthcare setting in the UK or other high-income countries with similar healthcare systems. Seven electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, ProQuest Central, ASSIA and Scopus) were searched from inception to October 2022. Two authors independently screened papers, extracted data, and assessed quality. This review included 137 studies and a narrative synthesis was performed. The review included both genome-wide association studies (GWAS) and related studies of polygenic risk scores, and consistently identified that these studies failed to report or inadequately reported genomic results in certain ethnic minorities or indigenous minority groups. Downstream this compromises the value of this research to improve genomic services for multi-ethnic populations in High-income countries. This can be improved by purposefully recruiting participants from these underrepresented communities.Review registration: Registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) in November 2022; ID: CRD42022371245.
Identifiers
42839026What 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.