↓ Skip to main content

Translating translational medicine into global health equity: What is needed?

Overview of attention for article published in Applied and Translational Genomics, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 Mendeley
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
Translating translational medicine into global health equity: What is needed?
Published in
Applied and Translational Genomics, March 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.atg.2016.03.004
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carol Isaacson Barash

Abstract

While genomics, and other omics, research is rapidly advancing in the US and Europe, progress has been slower in less resourced countries. The imbalance has given rise to concern about whether the benefits of these advances, namely new and better tests, treatments, risk identification, and prevention strategies, will be shared and available to those living in less resourced reaches of the globe. In effort to give voice to researchers, an informal survey about barriers to advancing translational medicine was administered to attendees of the 11th Asia Pacific Conference on Human Genetics, 2015, Hanoi. The overall goal of the survey was to identify unmet needs and rank their importance. Most attendees completed the survey. Not surprisingly funding is indicated as a major need. Respondents reported that lack of bioinformatics and computational tools, trained data scientists and access to datasets is creating a significant lag behind better resourced regions. Results are intended to inform efforts to create a regional consensus statement of need. Such a regional statement could help funding organizations and policy makers seeking to promote global genomics benefit sharing.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 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 %
Student > Master 8 22%
Student > Bachelor 4 11%
Lecturer 3 8%
Researcher 3 8%
Other 2 6%
Other 7 19%
Unknown 9 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 14%
Social Sciences 4 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 8%
Computer Science 2 6%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 11 31%
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 10 June 2018.
All research outputs
#8,558,226
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Applied and Translational Genomics
#51
of 99 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#113,139
of 315,237 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Applied and Translational Genomics
#12
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 99 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.3. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 315,237 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 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.