↓ Skip to main content

Ethics in Prevention Science Involving Genetic Testing

Overview of attention for article published in Prevention Science, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 Mendeley
Title
Ethics in Prevention Science Involving Genetic Testing
Published in
Prevention Science, January 2013
DOI 10.1007/s11121-012-0318-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Celia B. Fisher, Erika L. Harrington McCarthy

Abstract

The Human Genome Project and rapid technological advances in genomics have begun to enrich prevention science's contributions to understanding the role of genetic factors in the etiology, onset and escalation of mental disorders, allowing for more precise descriptions of the interplay between genetic and non-genetic influences. Understanding of ethical challenges associated with the integration of genetic data into prevention science has not kept pace with the rapid increase in the collection and storage of genetic data and dissemination of research results. This article discusses ethical issues associated with (1) decisions to withhold or disclose personal genetic information to participants; (2) implications of recruitment and data collection methods that may reveal genetic information of family members; and the (3) nature and timing of informed consent. These issues are presented within the contexts of adult and pediatric research, longitudinal studies, and use of biobanks for storage of genetic materials. Recommendations for research ethics decision-making are provided. The article concludes with a section on justice and research burdens and the unique ethical responsibilities of prevention scientists to ensure the new genomic science protects the informational rights of participants, their families and communities.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
United Kingdom 1 2%
Denmark 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 54 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 22%
Student > Master 13 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 12%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Other 7 12%
Unknown 7 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 10 17%
Psychology 9 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 7%
Other 12 20%
Unknown 12 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 30 August 2016.
All research outputs
#4,015,979
of 22,694,633 outputs
Outputs from Prevention Science
#260
of 1,022 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,487
of 281,767 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Prevention Science
#13
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,694,633 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,022 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 281,767 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.