↓ Skip to main content

Regulating whole exome sequencing as a diagnostic test

Overview of attention for article published in Human Genetics, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 Mendeley
citeulike
2 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
Regulating whole exome sequencing as a diagnostic test
Published in
Human Genetics, May 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00439-016-1677-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Valentina Lapin, Lindsey C. Mighion, Cristina P. da Silva, Ymkje Cuperus, Lora J. H. Bean, Madhuri R. Hegde

Abstract

In the last decade, there has been a flood of new technology in the sequencing arena. The onset of next-generation sequencing (NGS) technology has resulted in the vast increase in genetic diagnostic testing available to the ordering physician. Whole exome sequencing (WES) has become available as a diagnostic test performed in certified clinical laboratories. This has led to increased presence in the diagnostic marketplace, increased consumer awareness, and the question has been raised by various stakeholders to whether there is sufficient stringent regulation of WES and other NGS-based tests. We discuss the various WES services currently available in the marketplace, current regulation of WES as a laboratory developed test, the proposed FDA involvement in its oversight as well as the response of various laboratory groups that provide these diagnostic services. Overall, a rigorous process oversight and assessment of inter-lab reproducibility is strongly warranted for WES as it is used as a diagnostic test, but regulation should be mindful of the excessive administrative burden on academic and smaller diagnostic laboratories.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 3%
Argentina 1 1%
Unknown 73 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 19 25%
Student > Master 14 18%
Other 13 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 12%
Student > Postgraduate 7 9%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 6 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 29%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 20 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 22%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 1%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 8 11%
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 12 May 2016.
All research outputs
#15,372,369
of 22,869,263 outputs
Outputs from Human Genetics
#2,541
of 2,955 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#187,838
of 309,572 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Genetics
#20
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,869,263 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 2,955 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 309,572 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.