↓ Skip to main content

Public trust and ‘ethics review’ as a commodity: the case of Genomics England Limited and the UK’s 100,000 genomes project

Overview of attention for article published in Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, October 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 (#43 of 617)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
27 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
68 Mendeley
Title
Public trust and ‘ethics review’ as a commodity: the case of Genomics England Limited and the UK’s 100,000 genomes project
Published in
Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, October 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11019-017-9810-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gabrielle Natalie Samuel, Bobbie Farsides

Abstract

The UK Chief Medical Officer's 2016 Annual Report, Generation Genome, focused on a vision to fully integrate genomics into all aspects of the UK's National Health Service (NHS). This process of integration, which has now already begun, raises a wide range of social and ethical concerns, many of which were discussed in the final Chapter of the report. This paper explores how the UK's 100,000 Genomes Project (100 kGP)-the catalyst for Generation Genome, and for bringing genomics into the NHS-is negotiating these ethical concerns. The UK's 100 kGP, promoted and delivered by Genomics England Limited (GEL), is an innovative venture aiming to sequence 100,000 genomes from NHS patients who have a rare disease, cancer, or an infectious disease. GEL has emphasised the importance of ethical governance and decision-making. However, some sociological critique argues that biomedical/technological organisations presenting themselves as 'ethical' entities do not necessarily reflect a space within which moral thinking occurs. Rather, the 'ethical work' conducted (and displayed) by organisations is more strategic, relating to the politics of the organisation and the need to build public confidence. We set out to explore whether GEL's ethical framework was reflective of this critique, and what this tells us more broadly about how genomics is being integrated into the NHS in response to the ethical and social concerns raised in Generation Genome. We do this by drawing on a series of 20 interviews with individuals associated with or working at GEL.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 27 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 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 68 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 15%
Researcher 9 13%
Student > Bachelor 9 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 10%
Student > Postgraduate 3 4%
Other 12 18%
Unknown 18 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 9 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Other 16 24%
Unknown 21 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 14 April 2021.
All research outputs
#1,826,260
of 24,230,934 outputs
Outputs from Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy
#43
of 617 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,220
of 332,689 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy
#2
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,230,934 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 617 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 332,689 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 88% 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 done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.