ArticleCambridge prisms. Precision medicine2023
From genetic variation to precision medicine.
Article in Cambridge prisms. Precision medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Gut microbiota constituents may affect hypertrophic scarring risk through interaction with specific immune cells in a two-step, two-sample Mendelian randomization study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Preclinical research (on rare diseases): we need to talk about health equity.Mammalian genome : official journal of the International Mammalian Genome Society · 2025Review
- Scrutinizing neurodegenerative diseases: decoding the complex genetic architectures through a multi-omics lens.Human genomics · 2024Review
- Therapeutic effect of targeted antioxidant natural products.Discover nano · 2024Review
- Polyglutamine (PolyQ) Diseases: Navigating the Landscape of Neurodegeneration.ACS chemical neuroscience · 2024Review
- The role of zygotic genome activation in genetic-related reproductive medicine: Technological perspective, religious and bioethical concerns, challenges and benefits.Journal, genetic engineering & biotechnology · 2024Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Genetics has been an important tool for discovering new aspects of biology across life. In humans, there is growing momentum behind the application of this knowledge to drive innovation in clinical care, most notably through developments in precision medicine. Nowhere has the impact of genetics on clinical practice been more striking than in the field of rare disorders. For most of these conditions, individual disease susceptibility is influenced by DNA sequence variation in a single or a small number of genes. In contrast, most common disorders are multifactorial and are caused by a complex interplay of multiple genetic, environmental and stochastic factors. The longstanding division of human disease genetics into rare and common components has obscured the continuum of human traits and echoes aspects of the century-old debate between the Mendelian and biometric views of human genetics. In this article, we discuss the differences in data and concepts between rare and common disease genetics. Opportunities to unify these two areas are noted and the importance of adopting a holistic perspective that integrates diverse genetic and environmental factors is discussed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.