// Evidence Grader
Claim grades, A through F
Every major genomics claim in this course gets a transparent grade — from clinically established interventions to outright misleading marketing. Use this dashboard to audit what's settled, what's preliminary, and what's hype.
A
Clinically established
B
Supported, context-specific
C
Promising, preliminary
D
Plausible, unproven
E
Popular, weak support
F
Misleading or false
Filtered:← Back to module
A
Long-read sequencing resolves structural variants missed by short-read WGS
Established across multiple benchmarks; HG002 truthset sensitivity gain is well documented.
Module 02 · Reading the Genome: Platforms & Modalities →A
Native methylation calling on PacBio and ONT is accurate enough to replace bisulfite sequencing
Concordance >95% with WGBS at >5x coverage; saves a sample and is non-destructive.
Module 02 · Reading the Genome: Platforms & Modalities →B
Whole-exome sequencing has higher diagnostic yield than gene panels for most rare-disease workups
True for broad/atypical phenotypes; panels still preferred for well-defined disease with clear-cut gene lists.
Module 02 · Reading the Genome: Platforms & Modalities →C
Clinical-grade nanopore sequencing is ready for primary diagnostic use today
Increasingly true for SVs and methylation; SNV calling is competitive but not yet a default reimbursable replacement.
Module 02 · Reading the Genome: Platforms & Modalities →