A citation-based method for searching scientific literature

Yvonne Bombard, Kyle B Brothers, Sara Fitzgerald-Butt, Nanibaa' A Garrison, Leila Jamal, Cynthia A James, Gail P Jarvik, Jennifer B McCormick, Tanya N Nelson, Kelly E Ormond, Heidi L Rehm, Julie Richer, Emmanuelle Souzeau, Jason L Vassy, Jennifer K Wagner, Howard P Levy. Am J Hum Genet 2019
Times Cited: 59

List of co-cited articles
315 articles co-cited >1

Times Cited
  Times     Co-cited

Standards and guidelines for the interpretation of sequence variants: a joint consensus recommendation of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics and the Association for Molecular Pathology.
Sue Richards, Nazneen Aziz, Sherri Bale, David Bick, Soma Das, Julie Gastier-Foster, Wayne W Grody, Madhuri Hegde, Elaine Lyon, Elaine Spector,[...]. Genet Med 2015

Patient re-contact after revision of genomic test results: points to consider-a statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG).
Karen L David, Robert G Best, Leslie Manace Brenman, Lynn Bush, Joshua L Deignan, David Flannery, Jodi D Hoffman, Ingrid Holm, David T Miller, James O'Leary,[...]. Genet Med 2019

Recontacting patients in clinical genetics services: recommendations of the European Society of Human Genetics.
Daniele Carrieri, Heidi C Howard, Caroline Benjamin, Angus J Clarke, Sandi Dheensa, Shane Doheny, Naomi Hawkins, Tanya F Halbersma-Konings, Leigh Jackson, Hülya Kayserili,[...]. Eur J Hum Genet 2019

Recommendations for reporting of secondary findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing, 2016 update (ACMG SF v2.0): a policy statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics.
Sarah S Kalia, Kathy Adelman, Sherri J Bale, Wendy K Chung, Christine Eng, James P Evans, Gail E Herman, Sophia B Hufnagel, Teri E Klein, Bruce R Korf,[...]. Genet Med 2017

Return of genomic results to research participants: the floor, the ceiling, and the choices in between.
Gail P Jarvik, Laura M Amendola, Jonathan S Berg, Kyle Brothers, Ellen W Clayton, Wendy Chung, Barbara J Evans, James P Evans, Stephanie M Fullerton, Carlos J Gallego,[...]. Am J Hum Genet 2014

ACMG recommendations for reporting of incidental findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing.
Robert C Green, Jonathan S Berg, Wayne W Grody, Sarah S Kalia, Bruce R Korf, Christa L Martin, Amy L McGuire, Robert L Nussbaum, Julianne M O'Daniel, Kelly E Ormond,[...]. Genet Med 2013

Ethical and practical guidelines for reporting genetic research results to study participants: updated guidelines from a National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute working group.
Richard R Fabsitz, Amy McGuire, Richard R Sharp, Mona Puggal, Laura M Beskow, Leslie G Biesecker, Ebony Bookman, Wylie Burke, Esteban Gonzalez Burchard, George Church,[...]. Circ Cardiovasc Genet 2010

Points to consider in the reevaluation and reanalysis of genomic test results: a statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG).
Joshua L Deignan, Wendy K Chung, Hutton M Kearney, Kristin G Monaghan, Catherine W Rehder, Elizabeth C Chao. Genet Med 2019

Making new genetic diagnoses with old data: iterative reanalysis and reporting from genome-wide data in 1,133 families with developmental disorders.
Caroline F Wright, Jeremy F McRae, Stephen Clayton, Giuseppe Gallone, Stuart Aitken, Tomas W FitzGerald, Philip Jones, Elena Prigmore, Diana Rajan, Jenny Lord,[...]. Genet Med 2018

Analysis of VUS reporting, variant reinterpretation and recontact policies in clinical genomic sequencing consent forms.
Danya F Vears, Emilia Niemiec, Heidi Carmen Howard, Pascal Borry. Eur J Hum Genet 2018

Systematic reanalysis of clinical exome data yields additional diagnoses: implications for providers.
Aaron M Wenger, Harendra Guturu, Jonathan A Bernstein, Gill Bejerano. Genet Med 2017

Return of individual genomic research results: are laws and policies keeping step?
Adrian Thorogood, Gratien Dalpé, Bartha Maria Knoppers. Eur J Hum Genet 2019

Is there a duty to recontact in light of new genetic technologies? A systematic review of the literature.
Ellen Otten, Mirjam Plantinga, Erwin Birnie, Marian A Verkerk, Anneke M Lucassen, Adelita V Ranchor, Irene M Van Langen. Genet Med 2015

Observed frequency and challenges of variant reclassification in a hereditary cancer clinic.
Sarah Macklin, Nisha Durand, Paldeep Atwal, Stephanie Hines. Genet Med 2018

The impact of variant classification on the clinical management of hereditary cancer syndromes.
Scott A Turner, Smita K Rao, R Hayes Morgan, Cindy L Vnencak-Jones, Georgia L Wiesner. Genet Med 2019

Reanalysis of Clinical Exome Sequencing Data.
Pengfei Liu, Linyan Meng, Elizabeth A Normand, Fan Xia, Xiaofei Song, Andrew Ghazi, Jill Rosenfeld, Pilar L Magoulas, Alicia Braxton, Patricia Ward,[...]. N Engl J Med 2019

Offering individual genetic research results: context matters.
Laura M Beskow, Wylie Burke. Sci Transl Med 2010

ClinGen--the Clinical Genome Resource.
Heidi L Rehm, Jonathan S Berg, Lisa D Brooks, Carlos D Bustamante, James P Evans, Melissa J Landrum, David H Ledbetter, Donna R Maglott, Christa Lese Martin, Robert L Nussbaum,[...]. N Engl J Med 2015

Physicians' duty to recontact and update genetic advice.
Yvonne A Stevens, Grant D Senner, Gary E Marchant. Per Med 2017

Variant classification changes over time in BRCA1 and BRCA2.
Chloe Mighton, George S Charames, Marina Wang, Kathleen-Rose Zakoor, Andrew Wong, Salma Shickh, Nicholas Watkins, Matthew S Lebo, Yvonne Bombard, Jordan Lerner-Ellis. Genet Med 2019

Prevalence of Variant Reclassification Following Hereditary Cancer Genetic Testing.
Jacqueline Mersch, Nichole Brown, Sara Pirzadeh-Miller, Erin Mundt, Hannah C Cox, Krystal Brown, Melissa Aston, Lisa Esterling, Susan Manley, Theodora Ross. JAMA 2018

Managing incidental findings in human subjects research: analysis and recommendations.
Susan M Wolf, Frances P Lawrenz, Charles A Nelson, Jeffrey P Kahn, Mildred K Cho, Ellen Wright Clayton, Joel G Fletcher, Michael K Georgieff, Dale Hammerschmidt, Kathy Hudson,[...]. J Law Med Ethics 2008

Managing incidental findings and research results in genomic research involving biobanks and archived data sets.
Susan M Wolf, Brittney N Crock, Brian Van Ness, Frances Lawrenz, Jeffrey P Kahn, Laura M Beskow, Mildred K Cho, Michael F Christman, Robert C Green, Ralph Hall,[...]. Genet Med 2012

Attitudes of nearly 7000 health professionals, genomic researchers and publics toward the return of incidental results from sequencing research.
Anna Middleton, Katherine I Morley, Eugene Bragin, Helen V Firth, Matthew E Hurles, Caroline F Wright, Michael Parker. Eur J Hum Genet 2016

Is there a duty to reinterpret genetic data? The ethical dimensions.
Paul S Appelbaum, Erik Parens, Sara M Berger, Wendy K Chung, Wylie Burke. Genet Med 2020

Whole-exome sequencing reanalysis at 12 months boosts diagnosis and is cost-effective when applied early in Mendelian disorders.
Lisa J Ewans, Deborah Schofield, Rupendra Shrestha, Ying Zhu, Velimir Gayevskiy, Kevin Ying, Corrina Walsh, Eric Lee, Edwin P Kirk, Alison Colley,[...]. Genet Med 2018

Recontacting or not recontacting? A survey of current practices in clinical genetics centres in Europe.
Fabio Sirchia, Daniele Carrieri, Sandi Dheensa, Caroline Benjamin, Hülya Kayserili, Christophe Cordier, Carla G van El, Peter D Turnpenny, Bela Melegh, Álvaro Mendes,[...]. Eur J Hum Genet 2018

Analysis of protein-coding genetic variation in 60,706 humans.
Monkol Lek, Konrad J Karczewski, Eric V Minikel, Kaitlin E Samocha, Eric Banks, Timothy Fennell, Anne H O'Donnell-Luria, James S Ware, Andrew J Hill, Beryl B Cummings,[...]. Nature 2016

The Genomics ADvISER: development and usability testing of a decision aid for the selection of incidental sequencing results.
Yvonne Bombard, Marc Clausen, Chloe Mighton, Lindsay Carlsson, Selina Casalino, Emily Glogowski, Kasmintan Schrader, Michael Evans, Adena Scheer, Nancy Baxter,[...]. Eur J Hum Genet 2018

Recontacting in clinical practice: the views and expectations of patients in the United Kingdom.
Daniele Carrieri, Sandi Dheensa, Shane Doheny, Angus J Clarke, Peter D Turnpenny, Anneke M Lucassen, Susan E Kelly. Eur J Hum Genet 2017

A 'joint venture' model of recontacting in clinical genomics: challenges for responsible implementation.
Sandi Dheensa, Daniele Carrieri, Susan Kelly, Angus Clarke, Shane Doheny, Peter Turnpenny, Anneke Lucassen. Eur J Med Genet 2017

Societal preferences for the return of incidental findings from clinical genomic sequencing: a discrete-choice experiment.
Dean A Regier, Stuart J Peacock, Reka Pataky, Kimberly van der Hoek, Gail P Jarvik, Jeffrey Hoch, David Veenstra. CMAJ 2015

Secondary findings from clinical genomic sequencing: prevalence, patient perspectives, family history assessment, and health-care costs from a multisite study.
M Ragan Hart, Barbara B Biesecker, Carrie L Blout, Kurt D Christensen, Laura M Amendola, Katie L Bergstrom, Sawona Biswas, Kevin M Bowling, Kyle B Brothers, Laura K Conlin,[...]. Genet Med 2019

Automated Clinical Exome Reanalysis Reveals Novel Diagnoses.
Samuel W Baker, Jill R Murrell, Addie I Nesbitt, Kieran B Pechter, Jorune Balciuniene, Xiaonan Zhao, Zhenming Yu, Elizabeth H Denenberg, Elizabeth T DeChene, Alisha B Wilkens,[...]. J Mol Diagn 2019

Communicating new knowledge on previously reported genetic variants.
Samuel J Aronson, Eugene H Clark, Matthew Varugheese, Samantha Baxter, Lawrence J Babb, Heidi L Rehm. Genet Med 2012

Letter: Relearning the 3 R's? Reinterpretation, recontact, and return of genetic variants.
Bartha Maria Knoppers, Adrian Thorogood, Ma'n H Zawati. Genet Med 2019

Recommendations for interpreting the loss of function PVS1 ACMG/AMP variant criterion.
Ahmad N Abou Tayoun, Tina Pesaran, Marina T DiStefano, Andrea Oza, Heidi L Rehm, Leslie G Biesecker, Steven M Harrison. Hum Mutat 2018

Reinterpretation, reclassification, and its downstream effects: challenges for clinical laboratory geneticists.
Julia El Mecky, Lennart Johansson, Mirjam Plantinga, Angela Fenwick, Anneke Lucassen, Trijnie Dijkhuizen, Annemieke van der Hout, Kate Lyle, Irene van Langen. BMC Med Genomics 2019

Performance of ACMG-AMP Variant-Interpretation Guidelines among Nine Laboratories in the Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research Consortium.
Laura M Amendola, Gail P Jarvik, Michael C Leo, Heather M McLaughlin, Yassmine Akkari, Michelle D Amaral, Jonathan S Berg, Sawona Biswas, Kevin M Bowling, Laura K Conlin,[...]. Am J Hum Genet 2016

Disclosure of individual genetic data to research participants: the debate reconsidered.
Annelien L Bredenoord, Hester Y Kroes, Edwin Cuppen, Michael Parker, Johannes J M van Delden. Trends Genet 2011

Return of genetic and genomic research findings: experience of a pediatric biorepository.
Tanya Papaz, Eriskay Liston, Laura Zahavich, Dimitri J Stavropoulos, Rebekah K Jobling, Raymond H Kim, Miriam Reuter, Anastasia Miron, Erwin Oechslin, Tapas Mondal,[...]. BMC Med Genomics 2019

Clinical Utility of Reinterpreting Previously Reported Genomic Epilepsy Test Results for Pediatric Patients.
Jeffrey A SoRelle, Drew M Thodeson, Susan Arnold, Garrett Gotway, Jason Y Park. JAMA Pediatr 2019

Guidelines for diagnostic next-generation sequencing.
Gert Matthijs, Erika Souche, Mariëlle Alders, Anniek Corveleyn, Sebastian Eck, Ilse Feenstra, Valérie Race, Erik Sistermans, Marc Sturm, Marjan Weiss,[...]. Eur J Hum Genet 2016

A standardized, evidence-based protocol to assess clinical actionability of genetic disorders associated with genomic variation.
Jessica Ezzell Hunter, Stephanie A Irving, Leslie G Biesecker, Adam Buchanan, Brian Jensen, Kristy Lee, Christa Lese Martin, Laura Milko, Kristin Muessig, Annie D Niehaus,[...]. Genet Med 2016

Actionable exomic incidental findings in 6503 participants: challenges of variant classification.
Laura M Amendola, Michael O Dorschner, Peggy D Robertson, Joseph S Salama, Ragan Hart, Brian H Shirts, Mitzi L Murray, Mari J Tokita, Carlos J Gallego, Daniel Seung Kim,[...]. Genome Res 2015

Co-cited is the co-citation frequency, indicating how many articles cite the article together with the query article. Similarity is the co-citation as percentage of the times cited of the query article or the article in the search results, whichever is the lowest. These numbers are calculated for the last 100 citations when articles are cited more than 100 times.