| Title |
Clinical Cardiovascular Genetic Counselors Take a Leading Role in Team‐based Variant Classification
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Genetic Counseling, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10897-017-0175-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Chloe Reuter, Megan E. Grove, Kate Orland, Katherine Spoonamore, Colleen Caleshu |
| Abstract |
We sought to delineate the genetic test review and interpretation practices of clinical cardiovascular genetic counselors. A one-time anonymous online survey was taken by 46 clinical cardiovascular genetic counselors recruited through the National Society of Genetic Counselors Cardiovascular Special Interest Group. Nearly all (95.7%) gather additional information on variants reported on clinical genetic test reports and most (81.4%) assess the classification of such variants. Clinical cardiovascular genetic counselors typically (81.0%) classify variants in collaboration with cardiologist and/or geneticist colleagues, with the genetic counselor as the team member who is primarily responsible. Variant classification is a relatively recent (mean 3.2 years) addition to practice. Most genetic counselors learned classification skills on the job from clinical and laboratory colleagues. Recent graduates were more likely to have learned this in graduate school (p < 0.001). Genetic counselors are motivated to take responsibility for the classification of variants because of prior experiences with variant reclassification, inconsistencies between laboratories, and incomplete laboratory reports. They are also driven by a sense of professional duty and their proximity to the clinical context. This practice represents a broadening of the skill set of clinical cardiovascular genetic counselors and a unique expertise that they contribute to the interdisciplinary teams in which they work. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 22 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 | 9 | 41% |
| Australia | 2 | 9% |
| Finland | 1 | 5% |
| Israel | 1 | 5% |
| Spain | 1 | 5% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 5% |
| Canada | 1 | 5% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 5% |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 4 | 18% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 10 | 45% |
| Members of the public | 9 | 41% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 36 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 8% |
| Researcher | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 16 | 44% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 14% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 14% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Unknown | 17 | 47% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 20 March 2018.
All research outputs
#2,443,146
of 25,602,335 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Genetic Counseling
#83
of 1,291 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,204
of 445,193 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Genetic Counseling
#6
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,602,335 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,291 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. 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 445,193 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 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.