↓ Skip to main content

An Assessment of Time Involved in Pre‐test Case Review and Counseling for a Whole Genome Sequencing Clinical Research Program

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Genetic Counseling, February 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
91 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
An Assessment of Time Involved in Pre‐test Case Review and Counseling for a Whole Genome Sequencing Clinical Research Program
Published in
Journal of Genetic Counseling, February 2014
DOI 10.1007/s10897-014-9697-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Janet L. Williams, W. Andrew Faucett, Bethanny Smith‐Packard, Monisa Wagner, Marc S. Williams

Abstract

Whole genome sequencing (WGS) is being used for evaluation of individuals with undiagnosed disease of suspected genetic origin. Implementing WGS into clinical practice will place an increased burden upon care teams with regard to pre-test patient education and counseling about results. To quantitate the time needed for appropriate pre-test evaluation of participants in WGS testing, we documented the time spent by our clinical research group on various activities related to program preparation, participant screening, and consent prior to WGS. Participants were children or young adults with autism, intellectual or developmental disability, and/or congenital anomalies, who have remained undiagnosed despite previous evaluation, and their biologic parents. Results showed that significant time was spent in securing allocation of clinical research space to counsel participants and families, and in acquisition and review of participant's medical records. Pre-enrollment chart review identified two individuals with existing diagnoses resulting in savings of $30,000 for the genome sequencing alone, as well as saving hours of personnel time for genome interpretation and communication of WGS results. New WGS programs should plan for costs associated with additional pre-test administrative planning and patient evaluation time that will be required to provide high quality care.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 3%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 87 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 20 22%
Student > Master 15 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 10%
Student > Bachelor 7 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 5%
Other 14 15%
Unknown 21 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 21%
Psychology 12 13%
Social Sciences 8 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 8%
Computer Science 6 7%
Other 10 11%
Unknown 29 32%
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 07 March 2014.
All research outputs
#15,295,786
of 22,747,498 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Genetic Counseling
#771
of 1,141 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#131,272
of 221,166 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Genetic Counseling
#12
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,747,498 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 1,141 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 221,166 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 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.