↓ Skip to main content

Inclusion of diverse populations in genomic research and health services: Genomix workshop report

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Community Genetics, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#38 of 378)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 Mendeley
Title
Inclusion of diverse populations in genomic research and health services: Genomix workshop report
Published in
Journal of Community Genetics, July 2017
DOI 10.1007/s12687-017-0317-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Savio S. Mathew, Julian Barwell, Nasaim Khan, Ella Lynch, Michael Parker, Nadeem Qureshi

Abstract

Clinical genetic services and genomic research are rapidly developing but, historically, those with the greatest need are the least to benefit from these advances. This encompasses low-income communities, including those from ethnic minority and indigenous backgrounds. The "Genomix" workshop at the European Society of Human Genetics (ESHG) 2016 conference offered the opportunity to consider possible solutions for these disparities from the experiences of researchers and genetic healthcare practitioners working with underserved communities in the USA, UK and Australia. Evident from the workshop and corresponding literature is that a multi-faceted approach to engaging communities is essential. This needs to be complemented by redesigning healthcare systems that improves access and raises awareness of the needs of these communities. At a more strategic level, institutions involved in funding research, commissioning and redesigning genetic health services also need to be adequately represented by underserved populations with intrinsic mechanisms to disseminate good practice and monitor participation. Further, as genomic medicine is mainstreamed, educational programmes developed for clinicians should incorporate approaches to alleviate disparities in accessing genetic services and improving study participation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 50 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 16%
Researcher 7 14%
Other 4 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 8%
Other 8 16%
Unknown 11 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 10%
Social Sciences 5 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 6%
Other 13 26%
Unknown 12 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 10 July 2020.
All research outputs
#2,386,847
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Community Genetics
#38
of 378 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,564
of 317,652 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Community Genetics
#4
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 378 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 317,652 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 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 66% of its contemporaries.