↓ Skip to main content

Genomics in research and health care with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples

Overview of attention for article published in Monash Bioethics Review, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#46 of 150)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
Title
Genomics in research and health care with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples
Published in
Monash Bioethics Review, October 2015
DOI 10.1007/s40592-015-0037-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rebekah McWhirter, Dianne Nicol, Julian Savulescu

Abstract

Genomics is increasingly becoming an integral component of health research and clinical care. The perceived difficulties associated with genetic research involving Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people mean that they have largely been excluded as research participants. This limits the applicability of research findings for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander patients. Emergent use of genomic technologies and personalised medicine therefore risk contributing to an increase in existing health disparities unless urgent action is taken. To allow the potential benefits of genomics to be more equitably distributed, and minimise potential harms, we recommend five actions: (1) ensure diversity of participants by implementing appropriate protocols at the study design stage; (2) target diseases that disproportionately affect disadvantaged groups; (3) prioritise capacity building to promote Indigenous leadership across research professions; (4) develop resources for consenting patients or participants from different cultural and linguistic backgrounds; and (5) integrate awareness of issues relating to Indigenous people into the governance structures, formal reviews, data collection protocols and analytical pipelines of health services and research projects.

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 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 28 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 11%
Student > Bachelor 3 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Other 2 7%
Other 7 25%
Unknown 7 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 7%
Social Sciences 2 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 7%
Other 7 25%
Unknown 8 29%
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 26 February 2020.
All research outputs
#6,651,561
of 23,498,099 outputs
Outputs from Monash Bioethics Review
#46
of 150 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#82,518
of 286,116 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Monash Bioethics Review
#4
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,498,099 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 150 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 286,116 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 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.