↓ Skip to main content

A Mechanism for Controlled Access to GWAS Data: Experience of the GAIN Data Access Committee

Overview of attention for article published in American Journal of Human Genetics, April 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
A Mechanism for Controlled Access to GWAS Data: Experience of the GAIN Data Access Committee
Published in
American Journal of Human Genetics, April 2013
DOI 10.1016/j.ajhg.2012.08.034
Pubmed ID
Authors

Erin M. Ramos, Corina Din-Lovinescu, Ebony B. Bookman, Lisa J. McNeil, Carl C. Baker, Georgy Godynskiy, Emily L. Harris, Thomas Lehner, Catherine McKeon, Joel Moss, Vaurice L. Starks, Stephen T. Sherry, Teri A. Manolio, Laura Lyman Rodriguez

Abstract

The Genetic Association Information Network (GAIN) Data Access Committee was established in June 2007 to provide prompt and fair access to data from six genome-wide association studies through the database of Genotypes and Phenotypes (dbGaP). Of 945 project requests received through 2011, 749 (79%) have been approved; median receipt-to-approval time decreased from 14 days in 2007 to 8 days in 2011. Over half (54%) of the proposed research uses were for GAIN-specific phenotypes; other uses were for method development (26%) and adding controls to other studies (17%). Eight data-management incidents, defined as compromises of any of the data-use conditions, occurred among nine approved users; most were procedural violations, and none violated participant confidentiality. Over 5 years of experience with GAIN data access has demonstrated substantial use of GAIN data by investigators from academic, nonprofit, and for-profit institutions with relatively few and contained policy violations. The availability of GAIN data has allowed for advances in both the understanding of the genetic underpinnings of mental-health disorders, diabetes, and psoriasis and the development and refinement of statistical methods for identifying genetic and environmental factors related to complex common diseases.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users 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 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 4%
Argentina 1 4%
Unknown 26 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 21%
Student > Bachelor 5 18%
Professor 4 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 14%
Other 2 7%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 4 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 32%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 11%
Computer Science 3 11%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 7%
Other 4 14%
Unknown 4 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 06 May 2014.
All research outputs
#14,783,688
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from American Journal of Human Genetics
#5,219
of 5,879 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#115,508
of 212,991 outputs
Outputs of similar age from American Journal of Human Genetics
#47
of 58 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,879 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.3. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 212,991 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 58 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.