Evidence weight
How much confidence to place in the research and the way a finding was derived. It is not the size of your personal risk.
Our scientific method
Evidence should earn its place in your report.
Spoke does not treat every genetic association as a finding. A result has to survive checks for file coverage, evidence, relevance and limits before it reaches the page.
The standard
A useful finding needs more than a genetic signal.
The report has to make four things clear: what was found, what the source evidence supports, what remains uncertain, and what other information matters before anyone acts. That is how an interesting association becomes responsible interpretation.
Interpretation protocol
- 01Can this file support the analysis?
- 02How much weight should the evidence carry?
- 03Does the reference group fit the comparison?
- 04What does personal context change?
Outcome: show it, qualify it, or leave it out.
Three different questions
Do not confuse confidence, comparison and current health.
Reference position
Where a genetic estimate sits beside a relevant comparison group. It is not a diagnosis or a forecast of what will happen.
Current health
What symptoms, history, medicines and measured results show now. Genetics can add context, but it does not replace these signals.
Inspectable proof
See the reasoning, not just the conclusion.
This public sample shows how a fatigue-related result is separated into a genetic finding, its evidence, personal context and a clear limit. Source links stay attached so the reasoning can be checked.
Inside the anonymised Complete report
Inflammation & fatigue
Two separate findings. One important distinction: genetic tendencies do not tell us what is happening in your body today.
Malaise and fatigue
Genetic finding. Your DNA score sits towards the lower end of the comparison group for malaise and fatigue.
How much weight to give this score: More limited weight. Treat this result as background context only. It should not guide decisions on its own.
Limit: Fatigue is a symptom, not a single disease. A polygenic estimate cannot show whether someone is currently fatigued.
Research comparisons depend on the population studied and the DNA available in the file. Applicability can vary across ancestries.
Biobank association methods · Jiang et al., 2021 ↗
A source listed in the sample is not independent clinical validation of a Spoke report. Read the original sample entry ↗
C-reactive protein (CRP)
Genetic finding. Your DNA score sits towards the lower end of the comparison group for c-reactive protein.
How much weight to give this score: Lower weight. Treat this result as a small nudge. Your family history, symptoms and measurements should matter more.
Limit: C-reactive protein is a liver-made inflammation marker. It does not identify one disease or cause.
Research comparisons depend on the population studied and the DNA available in the file. Applicability can vary across ancestries.
GWAS Catalog · study GCST90018950 ↗
A source listed in the sample is not independent clinical validation of a Spoke report. Read the original sample entry ↗
Read together
Your experience completes the picture.
Sleep, symptoms, recent illness, medicines and measured results help establish what is relevant. These two DNA findings do not show that inflammation is causing fatigue.
Excerpts from a real anonymised public sample, with explanatory notes. They illustrate interpretation, not personal findings or advice for you.
How a finding is handled
Five gates between a raw file and a report.
Each gate answers a different question. Passing one does not remove the limits identified at another.
- 01
Start with what the file can support
Consumer raw DNA files contain a selection of genetic markers, not a complete genome. Spoke checks the file and the markers available before deciding which analyses are suitable.
Why the distinction matters: File coverage tells us whether an estimate can be attempted. Coverage alone does not make an estimate accurate.
- 02
Judge the research, not just the result
A published association is a starting point. The study design, population, model and limitations all affect how much weight a result deserves in a report.
Why the distinction matters: Evidence weight describes confidence in the research. It does not mean a high percentile equals high personal risk.
- 03
Keep the comparison group visible
Genetic estimates are interpreted against reference data. Performance can vary when a person’s ancestry or the source file differs from the populations used to develop the research.
Why the distinction matters: A reference comparison is useful context, with a boundary. It is not universally portable or clinically diagnostic.
- 04
Read genetics beside lived and measured context
Symptoms, family history, medicines, habits and laboratory results can change what a genetic tendency means in practice. The report keeps those forms of evidence distinct.
Why the distinction matters: A measured result describes what is happening now. A genetic estimate describes inherited tendency, within the limits of the available data.
- 05
Filter before a finding reaches the page
Findings must clear the report’s evidence, relevance, redundancy and safety gates. Signals that cannot be explained with proportionate limits should be qualified or left out.
Why the distinction matters: These are maintained report and publishing controls. They do not imply that a clinician personally reviews every customer report.
Accountability
Meet the scientific founder.
Spoke was founded by Alex de Giorgio, PhD. His background spans cancer research, immunology, biological sciences, drug discovery and AI-enabled science.
That scientific background informs the evidence discipline behind Spoke. It is not a substitute for clinical care or a claim of personal clinician review.
When you’re ready
A clearer question, not a diagnosis.
Spoke reports are educational. They do not replace clinical genetic testing, medication review, screening or professional assessment. If a result could change care, confirm it through the appropriate clinical route.
