NeuralCipher Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
BackgroundHuman genetics research lacks diversity; over 80% of genome-wide association studies have been conducted on individuals of European ancestry. In addition to limiting insights regarding disease mechanisms, disproportionate representation can create disparities preventing equitable implementation of personalized medicine.ObjectiveThis systematic review provides an overview of research involving Parkinson's disease (PD) genetics in underrepresented populations (URP) and sets a baseline to measure the future impact of current efforts in those populations.MethodsWe searched PubMed and EMBASE until October 2021 using search strings for "PD," "genetics," the main "URP," and and the countries in Latin America, Caribbean, Africa, Asia, and Oceania (excluding Australia and New Zealand). Inclusion criteria were original studies, written in English, reporting genetic results on PD from non-European populations. Two levels of independent reviewers identified and extracted information.ResultsWe observed imbalances in PD genetic studies among URPs. Asian participants from Greater China were described in the majority of the articles published (57%), but other populations were less well studied; for example, Blacks were represented in just 4.0% of the publications. Also, although idiopathic PD was more studied than monogenic forms of the disease, most studies analyzed a limited number of genetic variants. We identified just nine studies using a genome-wide approach published up to 2021, including URPs.ConclusionThis review provides insight into the significant lack of population diversity in PD research highlighting the immediate need for better representation. The Global Parkinson's Genetics Program (GP2) and similar initiatives aim to impact research in URPs, and the early metrics presented here can be used to measure progress in the field of PD genetics in the future. © 2022 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.