| Title |
Complex genetic diseases: controversy over the Croesus code
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Genome Biology, August 2001
|
| DOI | 10.1186/gb-2001-2-8-comment2007 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alan F Wright, Nicholas D Hastie |
| Abstract |
The polarization of views on how best to exploit new information from the Human Genome Project for medicine reflects our ignorance of the genetic architecture underlying common diseases: are susceptibility alleles common or rare, neutral or deleterious, few or many? Single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) technology is almost in place to dissect such diseases and to create a personalized medicine, but success is critically dependent on the biology and "Nature to be commanded must be obeyed" (Francis Bacon, 1620, Novum Organum). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 33% |
| Denmark | 1 | 8% |
| India | 1 | 8% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 8% |
| Colombia | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 4 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 50% |
| Scientists | 5 | 42% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 4% |
| Germany | 1 | 2% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 2% |
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 46 | 87% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 16 | 30% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 17% |
| Professor | 7 | 13% |
| Other | 6 | 11% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Unknown | 6 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 21 | 40% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 19% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 9% |
| Psychology | 3 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Unknown | 8 | 15% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 04 September 2014.
All research outputs
#5,290,274
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Genome Biology
#2,874
of 4,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,801
of 40,371 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Biology
#3
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,467 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.6. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 40,371 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.