The DOI matches its Crossref record.
ACMG recommendations for reporting of incidental findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing
Open accessAbstract
In clinical exome and genome sequencing, there is a potential for the recognition and reporting of incidental or secondary findings unrelated to the indication for ordering the sequencing but of medical value for patient care. The American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) recently published a policy statement on clinical sequencing that emphasized the importance of alerting the patient to the possibility of such results in pretest patient discussions, clinical testing, and reporting of results. The ACMG appointed a Working Group on Incidental Findings in Clinical Exome and Genome Sequencing to make recommendations about responsible management of incidental findings when patients undergo exome or genome sequencing. This Working Group conducted a year-long consensus process, including an open forum at the 2012 Annual Meeting and review by outside experts, and produced recommendations that have been approved by the ACMG Board. Specific and detailed recommendations, and the background and rationale for these recommendations, are described herein. The ACMG recommends that laboratories performing clinical sequencing seek and report mutations of the specified classes or types in the genes listed here. This evaluation and reporting should be performed for all clinical germline (constitutional) exome and genome sequencing, including the “normal” of tumor-normal subtractive analyses in all subjects, irrespective of age but excluding fetal samples. We recognize that there are insufficient data on penetrance and clinical utility to fully support these recommendations, and we encourage the creation of an ongoing process for updating these recommendations at least annually as further data are collected.Genet Med 2013:15(7):565–574
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
ClinVar: public archive of relationships among sequence variation and human phenotype
Landrum, M. J., Lee, J. M., Riley, G. R., Jang, W., Rubinstein, W. S., Church, D. M., & Maglott, D. R. (2014) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/gkt1113 · Cited by 3,516
Kalia, S. S., Adelman, K., Bale, S. J., Chung, W. K., Eng, C., Evans, J. P., Herman, G. E., Hufnagel, S. B., Klein, T. E., Korf, B. R., et al. (2017) · Genetics in Medicine · doi:10.1038/gim.2016.190 · Cited by 1,644
Self-citationMolecular Findings Among Patients Referred for Clinical Whole-Exome Sequencing
Yang, Y., Muzny, D. M., Xia, F., Niu, Z., Person, R., Ding, Y., Ward, P., Braxton, A., Wang, M., Buhay, C., et al. (2014) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2014.14601 · Cited by 1,360
Germline Mutations in Predisposition Genes in Pediatric Cancer
Zhang, J., Walsh, M. F., Wu, G., Edmonson, M. N., Gruber, T. A., Easton, J., Hedges, D., Ma, X., Zhou, X., Yergeau, D. A., et al. (2015) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1508054 · Cited by 1,345
Integrative omics for health and disease
Karczewski, K. J., & Snyder, M. P. (2018) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/nrg.2018.4 · Cited by 1,158
Metadata
- Authors
- Green, R. C., Berg, J. S., Grody, W. W., Kalia, S. S., Korf, B. R., Martin, C. L., McGuire, A. L., Nussbaum, R. L., O’Daniel, J. M., Ormond, K. E., Rehm, H. L., Watson, M. S., Williams, M. S., & Biesecker, L. G.
- Venue
- Genetics in Medicine
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2013-07
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 565-574
- ISSN
- 1098-3600 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2145922766
- Cited by
- 2,541
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 200.90
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: ACMG recommendations for reporting of incidental findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/gim.2013.73
- The paper
- Green, R. C., Berg, J. S., Grody, W. W., Kalia, S. S., Korf, B. R., Martin, C. L., McGuire, A. L., Nussbaum, R. L., O’Daniel, J. M., Ormond, K. E., Rehm, H. L., Watson, M. S., Williams, M. S., & Biesecker, L. G. (2013). ACMG recommendations for reporting of incidental findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing. Genetics in Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1038/gim.2013.73
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.