Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

PRS research shows 21.6% annual growth, projected to mature by 2026, with concentrated funding and geography

PRS research shows 21.6% annual growth, projected to mature by 2026, with concentrated funding and g…
Photo by Logan Voss / Unsplash
Key Takeaway
Note: PRS research volume is growing rapidly but remains concentrated geographically and in funding sources.

This systematic bibliometric review analyzed 10,269 PRS-related publications from 2,185 sources published globally between 1999 and 2024. The study mapped publication growth, geographic and institutional contributions, funding patterns, collaboration networks, and thematic evolution, without a direct clinical comparator. The analysis found a strong annual publication growth rate of 21.56%, with 1,580 articles published in 2024 alone. Logistic modeling showed excellent fit (R2 = 0.995), projecting an inflection point toward field maturation around 2026. The mean number of citations per article declined over time. Funding analysis indicated a limited set of public and philanthropic funders accounted for approximately one quarter of all funding acknowledgements, and research activity was geographically concentrated in the United States, China, and the United Kingdom. No safety or tolerability data were reported, as this was a bibliometric analysis of publications. A key limitation is that bibliometric analyses do not directly reflect the ancestry composition of the underlying study populations, which is a critical factor for the equitable clinical application of PRS. The practice relevance is restrained to understanding the evolution and structure of the PRS research field. The authors suggest continued efforts toward broad collaboration, diversified funding, and transparent reporting are needed to support globally representative and clinically robust implementation of PRS in precision medicine.

Study Details

Study typeSystematic review
EvidenceLevel 1
PublishedApr 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
Polygenic risk scores (PRS) have emerged as a central tool in genomic medicine, enabling risk prediction for common, complex diseases. Despite rapid methodological and clinical advances, concerns remain regarding the structural organization of PRS research, including geographic concentration, funding dominance, and limited global representation. A systematic, field-level assessment of PRS research evolution is needed to inform equitable and sustainable translation. We conducted a systematic bibliometric review of PRS research published between 1999 and 2024, using the Web of Science Core Collection to map publication growth, geographic and institutional contributions, funding patterns, collaboration networks, and thematic evolution. The final dataset comprised 10,269 PRS-related publications across 2,185 sources, exhibiting a strong annual growth rate of 21.56%. Publication output accelerated markedly after 2017, reaching 1,580 articles in 2024. Logistic modeling demonstrated an excellent fit (R2 = 0.995), identifying a projected inflection point in 2026 and suggesting transition toward field maturation. While publication volume increased, mean citations per article declined over time, reflecting a shift from foundational studies to high-volume research output. PRS research was highly concentrated geographically and institutionally, with the United States, China, and the United Kingdom accounting for the majority of publications, and a small number of elite academic centers dominating output. International collaboration was substantial but unevenly distributed. Funding analysis revealed a pronounced core-periphery structure, with a limited set of public and philanthropic funders accounting for approximately one quarter of all funding acknowledgements. Thematic analyses showed a progression from foundational genetic concepts toward disease-specific risk prediction and clinical applications, particularly in neuropsychiatric, cardiometabolic, and oncological domains. PRS research has evolved into a mature, high-volume field with expanding clinical relevance, yet remains structurally concentrated in terms of geography, institutions, and funding. While bibliometric analyses do not directly reflect the ancestry composition of study populations, the observed concentration patterns highlight the importance of continued efforts toward broad collaboration, diversified funding landscapes, and transparent reporting practices to support globally representative and clinically robust implementation of PRS in precision medicine.
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.