ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Predictive Biomarkers for Asymptomatic Adults: Opportunities, Risks, and Guidance for General Practice.
Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- High-Sensitivity Cardiac Troponin I in Apparently Healthy Blood Donors: Cross-Sectional Distribution and Discordance with Conventional Cardiovascular Risk Assessment Methods.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- From acute diagnosis to longitudinal risk stratification: a paradigm shift in the clinical role of cardiac biomarkers.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Biomarker-based prevention is rapidly expanding, driven by advances in molecular diagnostics, genetic profiling, and commercial direct-to-consumer (DTC) testing. General practitioners (GPs) increasingly encounter biomarker results of uncertain relevance, often introduced outside the guideline frameworks. This creates new challenges in interpretation, communication, and equitable resource use in primary care. This narrative review synthesizes evidence from population-based studies, guideline frameworks, consensus statements, and communication research to evaluate the predictive value, limitations, and real-world implications of biomarkers in asymptomatic adults. Attention is given to polygenic risk scores, DTC genetic tests, neurodegenerative and cardiovascular biomarkers, and emerging multi-omics and aging markers. Several biomarkers, including high-sensitivity cardiac troponins, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide, lipoprotein(a), coronary artery calcium scoring, and plasma p-tau species, showed robust predictive validity. However, many widely marketed biomarkers lack evidence of clinical utility, offer limited actionable benefits, or perform poorly in primary care populations. Unintended consequences, such as overdiagnosis, false positives, psychological distress, diagnostic cascades, and widening inequities, are well documented. Patients often misinterpret unvalidated biomarker results, whereas DTC testing amplifies demand without providing adequate counseling or follow-up. Only a minority of biomarkers currently meet the thresholds of analytical validity, clinical validity, and clinical utility required for preventive use in general practices. GPs play a critical role in contextualizing biomarker results, guiding shared decision-making, and mitigating potential harm. The responsible integration of biomarkers into preventive medicine requires clear communication, strong ethical safeguards, robust evidence, and system-level support for equitable, patient-centered care.
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.