Discover Community Create You

Loading publication...

Noodle always counts identifier-free feature events for service operation. With your permission, Google Analytics can also estimate audience and engagement. Search text, publication identifiers, cookies, IP addresses and browser fingerprints are never included in Noodle's first-party event counters.

Privacy details

Article

Secondary findings: How did we get here, and where are we going?

1 Mar 2019

Abstract excerpt

The American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) recommendations for reporting of incidental (now "secondary") findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing (Green et al., Genet Med 15:565, 2013) is an often cited and sometimes misapplied professional guideline. To best approach the current state of secondary findings (SFs) in genomic medicine, and consider their impact, it is helpful to understand...

Read the complete abstract on PubMed

Topics

Share this publication in a Topic to start or enrich a Post.

Share to Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Share to Genetic factors in colorectal cancer
Share to Genomics and Rare Diseases

Methodology Data sources Editorial policy Privacy About Contact Helena Bioinformatics

Source

Identifiers

PMID: 30821867
DOI: 10.1002/jgc4.1098

Provenance

PubMed metadata and Literature Corpus relationships. Corpus snapshot updated 8 Sept 2026.

Related research

Semantic proximity does not establish scientific evidence.

Research trail→

Click a neighbor to travelStep 1 · 12 closest

Secondary findings: How did we get here, and where are we going?PMID 30821867Read ↗

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 GenomicsSemantic proximity Read ↗

A Comprehensive Follow-Up Study Identifying Diagnostic Evidences for Secondary FindingSemantic proximity Read ↗

ACMG SF v3.2 list for reporting of secondary findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing: A policy statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG)Semantic proximity Read ↗

ACMG SF v3.3 list for reporting of secondary findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing: A policy statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG)Semantic proximity Read ↗

ACMG SF v3.1 list for reporting of secondary findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing: A policy statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG)Semantic proximity Read ↗

ACMG SF v3.0 list for reporting of secondary findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing: a policy statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG)Semantic proximity Read ↗

Incidental Findings from Clinical Genome‐Wide Sequencing: A ReviewSemantic proximity Read ↗

Not-so-incidental findings: the ACMG recommendations on the reporting of incidental findings in clinical whole genome and whole exome sequencingSemantic proximity Read ↗

Paternalism and the ACMG recommendations on genomic incidental findings: patients seen but not heardSemantic proximity Read ↗

Reporting Practices for Secondary Findings among ERN GENTURIS Member Institutions in 15 European CountriesSemantic proximity Read ↗

A comprehensive genomic reporting structure for communicating all clinically significant primary and secondary findingsSemantic proximity Read ↗

Recommendations for reporting of secondary findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing, 2021 update: a policy statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG)Semantic proximity Read ↗

⌁Select a neighboring publication to make it the new centre.