↓ Skip to main content

Candidate-gene criteria for clinical reporting: diagnostic exome sequencing identifies altered candidate genes among 8% of patients with undiagnosed diseases

Overview of attention for article published in Genetics in Medicine, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
9 news outlets
policy
1 policy source
twitter
18 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
46 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
55 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Candidate-gene criteria for clinical reporting: diagnostic exome sequencing identifies altered candidate genes among 8% of patients with undiagnosed diseases
Published in
Genetics in Medicine, August 2016
DOI 10.1038/gim.2016.95
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kelly D. Farwell Hagman, Deepali N. Shinde, Cameron Mroske, Erica Smith, Kelly Radtke, Layla Shahmirzadi, Dima El-Khechen, Zöe Powis, Elizabeth C. Chao, Wendy A. Alcaraz, Katherine L. Helbig, Samin A. Sajan, Mari Rossi, Hsiao-Mei Lu, Robert Huether, Shuwei Li, Sitao Wu, Mark E. Nuñes, Sha Tang

Abstract

Diagnostic exome sequencing (DES) is now a commonly ordered test for individuals with undiagnosed genetic disorders. In addition to providing a diagnosis for characterized diseases, exome sequencing has the capacity to uncover novel candidate genes for disease. Family-based DES included analysis of both characterized and novel genetic etiologies. To evaluate candidate genes for disease in the clinical setting, we developed a systematic, rule-based classification schema. Testing identified a candidate gene among 7.7% (72/934) of patients referred for DES; 37 (4.0%) and 35 (3.7%) of the genes received evidence scores of "candidate" and "suspected candidate," respectively. A total of 71 independent candidate genes were reported among the 72 patients, and 38% (27/71) were subsequently corroborated in the peer-reviewed literature. This rate of corroboration increased to 51.9% (27/52) among patients whose gene was reported at least 12 months previously. Herein, we provide transparent, comprehensive, and standardized scoring criteria for the clinical reporting of candidate genes. These results demonstrate that DES is an integral tool for genetic diagnosis, especially for elucidating the molecular basis for both characterized and novel candidate genetic etiologies. Gene discoveries also advance the understanding of normal human biology and more common diseases.Genet Med advance online publication 11 August 2016Genetics in Medicine (2016); doi:10.1038/gim.2016.95.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 55 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 19 35%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 15%
Student > Master 6 11%
Other 6 11%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 7 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 30 55%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 9%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 8 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 79. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 October 2019.
All research outputs
#547,070
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from Genetics in Medicine
#138
of 2,970 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,811
of 372,729 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genetics in Medicine
#10
of 60 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,970 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 372,729 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 60 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.