ArticleGenetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics2026
Arriving at a diagnosis: Effective strategies used by the Undiagnosed Diseases Network.
Article in Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical 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
30 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeDespite the increasing use of exome sequencing (ES) and genome sequencing (GS) in clinical settings, many individuals remain undiagnosed. This study examined the Undiagnosed Diseases Network (UDN)'s approach to establishing diagnoses for participants.
methodsAs a continuation of the first UDN cohort (9/16/2015-5/23/2017), this study reviewed diagnostic strategies and outcomes in the second UDN cohort (5/24/2017-6/30/2023).
resultsOver the study period, the proportion of UDN participants with prior ES/GS increased from 40.2% to 75.0%. The diagnostic rate for the UDN was 22.1% (379/1,713). Reanalysis/reinterpretation of sequencing data (prior ES: 21.4%, prior GS: 2.6%, UDN ES: 4.8%, UDN GS: 17.3%) yielded the greatest number of diagnoses, and the most frequent supporting strategy was case matching (25.6%). Aggregation of clinical information (57.7%) and clinical testing (42.3%) were the primary strategies used to identify non-genetic diagnoses (n=26). Notably, 235 diagnoses (59.9%) required research efforts beyond current standard clinical approaches.
conclusionThe UDN addresses challenging undiagnosed cases by integrating clinical expertise with research strategies that go beyond standard care. By employing these advanced approaches, the UDN resolves cases that remain unsolved in routine clinical settings, demonstrating the power of connecting research and clinical 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.