↓ Skip to main content

Consumer Perceptions of Interactions With Primary Care Providers After Direct-to-Consumer Personal Genomic Testing.

Overview of attention for article published in ACP Journal Club, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
13 news outlets
blogs
4 blogs
twitter
93 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
77 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
137 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Consumer Perceptions of Interactions With Primary Care Providers After Direct-to-Consumer Personal Genomic Testing.
Published in
ACP Journal Club, March 2016
DOI 10.7326/m15-0995
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cathelijne H van der Wouden, Deanna Alexis Carere, Anke H Maitland-van der Zee, Mack T Ruffin, J Scott Roberts, Robert C Green

Abstract

Direct-to-consumer (DTC) personal genomic testing (PGT) allows individuals to learn about their genetic makeup without going through a physician, but some consumers share their results with their primary care provider (PCP). To describe the characteristics and perceptions of DTC PGT consumers who discuss their results with their PCP. Longitudinal, prospective cohort study. Online survey before and 6 months after results. DTC PGT consumers. Consumer satisfaction with the DTC PGT experience; whether and, if so, how many results could be used to improve health; how many results were not understood; and beliefs about the PCP's understanding of genetics. Participants were asked with whom they had discussed their results. Genetic reports were linked to survey responses. Among 1026 respondents, 63% planned to share their results with a PCP. At 6-month follow-up, 27% reported having done so, and 8% reported sharing with another health care provider only. Common reasons for not sharing results with a health care provider were that the results were not important enough (40%) or that the participant did not have time to do so (37%). Among participants who discussed results with their PCP, 35% were very satisfied with the encounter, and 18% were not at all satisfied. Frequently identified themes in participant descriptions of these encounters were actionability of the results or use in care (32%), PCP engagement or interest (25%), and lack of PCP engagement or interest (22%). Participants may not be representative of all DTC PGT consumers. A comprehensive picture of DTC PGT consumers who shared their results with a health care provider is presented. The proportion that shares results is expected to increase with time after testing as consumers find opportunities for discussion at later appointments or if results become relevant as medical needs evolve. National Institutes of Health.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 93 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 137 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Korea, Republic of 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Unknown 135 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 36 26%
Researcher 24 18%
Student > Bachelor 16 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 10%
Other 11 8%
Other 22 16%
Unknown 14 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 44 32%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 27 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 9%
Social Sciences 8 6%
Computer Science 6 4%
Other 20 15%
Unknown 20 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 175. 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 16 April 2019.
All research outputs
#230,275
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from ACP Journal Club
#978
of 13,039 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,058
of 312,604 outputs
Outputs of similar age from ACP Journal Club
#19
of 136 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,039 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 63.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 312,604 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 136 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.