↓ Skip to main content

The wide variation of definitions of genetic testing in international recommendations, guidelines and reports

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Community Genetics, February 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 Mendeley
Title
The wide variation of definitions of genetic testing in international recommendations, guidelines and reports
Published in
Journal of Community Genetics, February 2012
DOI 10.1007/s12687-012-0084-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jorge Sequeiros, Milena Paneque, Bárbara Guimarães, Elina Rantanen, Poupak Javaher, Irma Nippert, Jörg Schmidtke, Helena Kääriäainen, Ulf Kristoffersson, Jean-Jacques Cassiman

Abstract

In spite of being very commonly used, the term genetic testing is debatable and used with several meanings. The diversity of existing definitions is confusing for scientists, clinicians and other professionals, health authorities, legislators and regulating agencies and the civil society in general, particularly when genetic testing is the object of guidelines or legal documents. This work compares definitions of genetic testing found in recommendations, guidelines and reports from international institutions, policy makers and professional organizations, but also in documents from other stakeholders in the field, as the pharmaceutical industry, insurers, ethics bodies, patient organizations or human-rights associations. A systematic review of these documents confirmed the extreme variability existing in the concepts and the ambiguous or equivocal use of the term. Some definitions (narrower) focus on methodologies or the material analysed, while others (broader) are information- or context-based. Its scope may range from being synonymous of just DNA analysis, to any test that yields genetic data. Genetic testing and genetic information, which may be derived from a range of medical exams or even family history, are often used interchangeably. Genetic testing and genetic screening are sometimes confused. Human molecular genetics (a discipline) is not always distinguished from molecular biology (a tool). Professional background, geographical context and purpose of the organizations may influence scope and usage. A common consensus definition does not exist. Nevertheless, a clear set of precise definitions may help creating a common language among geneticists and other health professionals. Moreover, a clear context-dependent, operative definition should always be given.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Belgium 1 2%
Unknown 46 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 31%
Student > Master 8 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 10%
Other 4 8%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 6 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 22%
Social Sciences 6 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 8%
Arts and Humanities 3 6%
Other 12 24%
Unknown 8 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 19 April 2012.
All research outputs
#15,242,847
of 22,664,267 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Community Genetics
#252
of 359 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#99,775
of 155,661 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Community Genetics
#7
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,664,267 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 359 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 155,661 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.