ArticleJournal of community genetics2026
Distinguishing social and medical traits: perspectives of scientists using polygenic scores.
Article in Journal of community genetics, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Polygenic scores (PGS) have been developed for a wide variety of traits, such as cancer, risk tolerance, obesity, asthma, educational attainment, and cardiovascular disease. Prior research shows that the public tends to view the use of genetic information for medical traits more favorably than for social or other non-medical traits, and legal and policy discourse regularly treats medical and social traits as distinct categories. However, distinguishing between social and medical traits can be conceptually and practically challenging. Drawing on 47 semi-structured interviews with researchers who have developed or utilized PGS across a range of traits, this study examines how scientists discussed and conceptualized a dividing line between what is medical and what is social, as well as the perceived necessity of a medical/social divide. Overall, the scientists we interviewed broadly agreed that the line is ambiguous; they did not hold unequivocal views about what constitutes a social versus a medical trait, nor where a clear line might be drawn. Instead, they reasoned through any distinctions between social and medical traits in varied and sometimes conflicting ways, including attempting to draw the line, highlighting the role of social context in drawing the line, questioning the line’s relevance, and pointing to the line’s policy implications. We argue that this ambiguity has significant implications for how PGS research is conducted, interpreted, and regulated, calling for a reexamination of regulatory strategies that rely on this distinction.
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.