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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Why precision medicine is not the best route to a healthier world
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Revista de Saúde Pública, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.11606/s1518-8787.2018052000209 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Juan Pablo Rey-López, Thiago Herick de Sá, Leandro Fórnias Machado de Rezende |
| Abstract |
Precision medicine has been announced as a new health revolution. The term precision implies more accuracy in healthcare and prevention of diseases, which could yield substantial cost savings. However, scientific debate about precision medicine is needed to avoid wasting economic resources and hype. In this commentary, we express the reasons why precision medicine cannot be a health revolution for population health. Advocates of precision medicine neglect the limitations of individual-centred, high-risk strategies (reduced population health impact) and the current crisis of evidence-based medicine. Overrated "precision medicine" promises may be serving vested interests, by dictating priorities in the research agenda and justifying the exorbitant healthcare expenditure in our finance-based medicine. If societies aspire to address strong risk factors for non-communicable diseases (such as air pollution, smoking, poor diets, or physical inactivity), they need less medicine and more investment in population prevention strategies. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 31 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 11 | 35% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 6% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 6% |
| Researcher | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 5 | 16% |
| Unknown | 5 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 19% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 13% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 3 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 8 | 26% |
| Unknown | 6 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 27 March 2018.
All research outputs
#6,600,606
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Revista de Saúde Pública
#190
of 1,138 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#123,592
of 450,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista de Saúde Pública
#3
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,138 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 450,499 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 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 72% of its contemporaries.