| Title |
Patient accounts of diagnostic testing for familial hypercholesterolaemia: comparing responses to genetic and non-genetic testing methods
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Genomics, September 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2350-13-87 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gareth J Hollands, David Armstrong, Angela Macfarlane, Martin A Crook, Theresa M Marteau |
| Abstract |
Continuing developments in genetic testing technology together with research revealing gene-disease associations have brought closer the potential for genetic screening of populations. A major concern, as with any screening programme, is the response of the patient to the findings of screening, whether the outcome is positive or negative. Such concern is heightened for genetic testing, which it is feared may elicit stronger reactions than non-genetic testing. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Norway | 1 | 25% |
| Canada | 1 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| Brazil | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| New Zealand | 1 | 5% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 5% |
| Denmark | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 18 | 86% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 33% |
| Professor | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 14% |
| Unknown | 3 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 52% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 10% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 4 | 19% |
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 01 May 2013.
All research outputs
#8,474,477
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Genomics
#634
of 2,444 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#64,327
of 189,238 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Genomics
#10
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 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 2,444 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 189,238 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 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.