| Title |
Stem Cell Research and Therapy: The Position of the National Society of Genetic Counselors
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Genetic Counseling, February 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10897-013-9572-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Brianne Kirkpatrick, Laura Hercher, Flavia Facio, Jill Fonda, Susan Hahn, Julie Sapp, Heather Zierhut, The Stem Cell Research Task Force on behalf of the Public Policy Committee |
| Abstract |
Stem cells' regenerative capabilities present a unique opportunity to treat human illness and injury. In 2003, the National Society of Genetic Counselors (NSGC) issued a position statement supporting stem cell use in research settings. Almost a decade later, in response to legislative and technological developments within the field of stem cell science, NSGC convened a task force to revisit and update its statement on stem cell research. In doing so, the Task Force developed a new statement reaffirming NSGC's support for stem cell research and endorsed continued stem cell therapy development. NSGC recognizes that the unique potential of stem cell therapy to treat human disease and injury can be realized only through research on a diverse array of stem cell lines drawn from multiple sources, including embryonic, cord blood, and adult cells. NSGC supports the use of stem cells in research and clinical settings when practices adhere to defined ethical and legal guidelines. Available stem cell lines should reflect our genetically diverse population, and donor recruitment should be without discrimination or coercion and include a thorough and dynamic informed consent process. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Denmark | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 26 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 19% |
| Researcher | 5 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 11% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 11% |
| Unknown | 4 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 22% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 19% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 15% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 4% |
| Philosophy | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 8 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 07 July 2013.
All research outputs
#15,274,055
of 22,713,403 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Genetic Counseling
#771
of 1,141 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#121,334
of 192,997 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Genetic Counseling
#8
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,713,403 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,141 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 192,997 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.