Evidence mapPaperPMID 42445728Full record

ArticleFrontiers in genetics2026

Rethinking scale in AI-driven genomic medicine - The role of small biobanks.

Laura Grech, Nikolai Paul Pace

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Laura GrechDepartment of Applied Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Malta, Msida, Malta.
Nikolai Paul PaceDepartment of Anatomy, Faculty of Medicine and Surgery, University of Malta, Msida, Malta.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Artificial intelligence is rapidly advancing genomic medicine, but its clinical trustworthiness cannot be secured by larger datasets alone. This perspective argues that small biobanks, including national, regional, hospital-linked and disease-focused collections provide essential stress tests for AI-driven genomic medicine because they expose failures in population calibration, rare-variant interpretation, phenotype realism, privacy protection, and governance. Rather than serving primarily as substrates for training general-purpose models, small biobanks are most valuable as environments for external validation, local calibration, interpretability, federated analysis, and accountable deployment. Their local representativeness, clinical linkage, and governance structures can help determine whether AI predictions remain valid and clinically useful outside the large datasets on which they were developed. Trustworthy AI-powered genomic medicine will therefore depend not only on larger models and larger datasets, but also on smaller, well-governed biobanks that force those models to prove their validity in real-world settings.

Indexed as

artificail intelligence (AI)biobanksethicalgenomic medicinelegal and social issues (ELSI)

Identifiers

PMID42445728
PMCPMC13363060

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.