ArticleClinical and translational discovery2024
GWAS advancements to investigate disease associations and biological mechanisms.
Article in Clinical and translational discovery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Influence of Genetic and Epigenetic Factors on Periodontitis Susceptibility and Treatment Outcomes.Biochemical genetics · 2026Review
- Incorporating GO/KEGG Functional Annotations Improves the Accuracy and Stability of Genomic Prediction Across Diverse Beef Cattle Populations.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- Predicting rice drought-responsive genes via distance-based prototypical graph neural network with path aggregation mechanism.Plant methods · 2026Article
- A multimodal vision knowledge graph of cardiovascular disease.Nature cardiovascular research · 2026Article
- Genetic Architecture of Ischemic Stroke: Insights from Genome-Wide Association Studies and Beyond.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have been instrumental in elucidating the genetic architecture of various traits and diseases. Despite the success of GWAS, inherent limitations such as identifying rare and ultra-rare variants, the potential for spurious associations, and in pinpointing causative agents can undermine diagnostic capabilities. This review provides an overview of GWAS and highlights recent advances in genetics that employ a range of methodologies, including Whole Genome Sequencing (WGS), Mendelian Randomization (MR), the Pangenome's high-quality T2T-CHM13 panel, and the Human BioMolecular Atlas Program (HuBMAP), as potential enablers of current and future GWAS research. State of the literature demonstrate the capabilities of these techniques in enhancing the statistical power of GWAS. WGS, with its comprehensive approach, captures the entire genome, surpassing the capabilities of the traditional GWAS technique focused on predefined Single Nucleotide Polymorphism (SNP) sites. The Pangenome's T2T-CHM13 panel, with its holistic approach, aids in the analysis of regions with high sequence identity, such as segmental duplications (SDs). Mendelian Randomization has advanced causative inference, improving clinical diagnostics and facilitating definitive conclusions. Furthermore, spatial biology techniques like HuBMAP, enable 3D molecular mapping of tissues at single-cell resolution, offering insights into pathology of complex traits. This study aims to elucidate and advocate for the increased application of these technologies, highlighting their potential to shape the future of GWAS research.
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.