↓ Skip to main content

Identification of Individuals at Risk for Lynch Syndrome Using Targeted Evaluations and Genetic Testing: National Society of Genetic Counselors and the Collaborative Group of the Americas on…

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Genetic Counseling, December 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
116 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
139 Mendeley
Title
Identification of Individuals at Risk for Lynch Syndrome Using Targeted Evaluations and Genetic Testing: National Society of Genetic Counselors and the Collaborative Group of the Americas on Inherited Colorectal Cancer Joint Practice Guideline
Published in
Journal of Genetic Counseling, December 2011
DOI 10.1007/s10897-011-9465-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Scott M. Weissman, Randall Burt, James Church, Steve Erdman, Heather Hampel, Spring Holter, Kory Jasperson, Matt F. Kalady, Joy Larsen Haidle, Henry T. Lynch, Selvi Palaniappan, Paul E. Wise, Leigha Senter

Abstract

Identifying individuals who have Lynch syndrome (LS) involves a complex diagnostic work up that includes taking a detailed family history and a combination of various genetic and immunohistochemical tests. The National Society of Genetic Counselors (NSGC) and the Collaborative Group of the Americas on Inherited Colorectal Cancer (CGA-ICC) have come together to publish this clinical practice testing guideline for the evaluation of LS. The purpose of this practice guideline is to provide guidance and a testing algorithm for LS as well as recommendations on when to offer testing. This guideline does not replace a consultation with a genetics professional. This guideline includes explanations in support of this and a summary of background data. While this guideline is not intended to serve as a review of LS, it includes a discussion of background information on LS, and cites a number of key publications which should be reviewed for a more in-depth understanding of LS. These guidelines are intended for genetic counselors, geneticists, gastroenterologists, surgeons, medical oncologists, obstetricians and gynecologists, nurses and other healthcare providers who evaluate patients for LS.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 139 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 1%
Canada 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 135 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 39 28%
Researcher 19 14%
Other 13 9%
Student > Bachelor 12 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 9%
Other 21 15%
Unknown 23 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 43 31%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 41 29%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 4%
Social Sciences 5 4%
Other 10 7%
Unknown 24 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 01 September 2016.
All research outputs
#6,453,990
of 22,919,505 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Genetic Counseling
#408
of 1,152 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#57,497
of 243,418 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Genetic Counseling
#5
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,919,505 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,152 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 243,418 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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.