↓ Skip to main content

Fortune and hindsight: gene patents’ muted effect on medical practice

Overview of attention for article published in British Medical Bulletin, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
6 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.
Article details
Title
Fortune and hindsight: gene patents’ muted effect on medical practice
Published in
British Medical Bulletin, March 2018
DOI 10.1093/bmb/ldy009
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Physicians have long worried about gene patents' potential to restrict their medical practices. Fortune and hindsight have proven these worries exaggerated both in the UK and elsewhere. Neither current nor future medical practices appear to be impinged by gene patents, although they may be subject to future intellectual property disputes. Qualitative and quantitative (survey) studies of gene patents' effects on medical practice; recent developments in patent law. Traditional gene patents do not appear to have restricted medical practice in the UK, although their effect elsewhere has been more nuanced. Whether patents will restrict the spread of newer medical technologies is unresolved. Continuing survey data on practitioners' views concerning patents' role in the distribution of newer technologies would be beneficial.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 6 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 6 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 17%
Librarian 1 17%
Other 1 17%
Student > Master 1 17%
Researcher 1 17%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 1 17%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 2 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 17%
Psychology 1 17%
Unknown 1 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 13 June 2018.
All research outputs
#13,893,313
of 23,031,582 outputs
Outputs from British Medical Bulletin
#898
of 1,075 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#176,820
of 329,889 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Medical Bulletin
#9
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,031,582 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,075 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.0. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 329,889 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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.