| Title |
Impact of genetic risk assessment on nutrition-related lifestyle behaviours
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, October 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1017/s0029665112002741 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jacqueline A. Vernarelli |
| Abstract |
Genetic susceptibility testing for common complex disease is a practice that is currently in clinical use. There are two types of gene mutations, and therefore, two varieties of genotype testing: deterministic and susceptibility. As the term suggests, deterministic genes determine whether or not a person will develop a given trait in mendelian fashion, such as Huntington's disease. Genotype screening for such deterministic mutations has existed for decades, and is commonly used in routine medical practice. In recent years, the sequencing of the human genome has identified several 'susceptibility genes' or genes with incomplete penetrance. Mutations in these genes may increase disease susceptibility, but are not causative for disease. Genetic susceptibility testing allows unaffected individuals to obtain risk information for a variety of common complex diseases and health conditions including Alzheimer's disease (AD), CVD, cancer and diabetes. The availability of genetic susceptibility testing has increased over the past decade, and several studies are now focusing on the impact that genetic testing has on health and other lifestyle behaviours related to nutrition. The aim of this paper is to review the literature and evaluate what, if any, impact genetic risk assessment has on behaviours related to nutrition and physical activity. This paper summarises seven clinical studies that evaluated the impact of disclosing genetic risk information for disease on nutrition-related health behaviour changes. Of these seven studies, only three studies reported that health behaviour change was influenced by genotype disclosure. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 97 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 97 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 17 | 18% |
| Researcher | 16 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 14 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 18 | 19% |
| Unknown | 14 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 26% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 8% |
| Psychology | 8 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 7% |
| Other | 21 | 22% |
| Unknown | 19 | 20% |
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 25 April 2018.
All research outputs
#15,169,543
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Proceedings of the Nutrition Society
#1,191
of 1,703 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#118,102
of 202,171 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Proceedings of the Nutrition Society
#11
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 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 1,703 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.8. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 202,171 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.