| Title |
Development and Characterization of Reference Materials for Genetic Testing: Focus on Public Partnerships
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annals of Laboratory Medicine, August 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3343/alm.2016.36.6.513 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lisa V. Kalman, Vivekananda Datta, Mickey Williams, Justin M. Zook, Marc L. Salit, Jin-Yeong Han |
| Abstract |
Characterized reference materials (RMs) are needed for clinical laboratory test development and validation, quality control procedures, and proficiency testing to assure their quality. In this article, we review the development and characterization of RMs for clinical molecular genetic tests. We describe various types of RMs and how to access and utilize them, especially focusing on the Genetic Testing Reference Materials Coordination Program (Get-RM) and the Genome in a Bottle (GIAB) Consortium. This review also reinforces the need for collaborative efforts in the clinical genetic testing community to develop additional RMs. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 19% |
| Other | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 13% |
| Unknown | 9 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 11 | 35% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 16% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 6% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 3% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 9 | 29% |
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 September 2016.
All research outputs
#20,656,820
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Laboratory Medicine
#364
of 618 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#275,218
of 352,663 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Laboratory Medicine
#4
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 618 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.1. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 352,663 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.