| Title |
Public variant databases: liability?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Genetics in Medicine, December 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1038/gim.2016.189 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Adrian Thorogood, Robert Cook-Deegan, Bartha Maria Knoppers |
| Abstract |
Public variant databases support the curation, clinical interpretation, and sharing of genomic data, thus reducing harmful errors or delays in diagnosis. As variant databases are increasingly relied on in the clinical context, there is concern that negligent variant interpretation will harm patients and attract liability. This article explores the evolving legal duties of laboratories, public variant databases, and physicians in clinical genomics and recommends a governance framework for databases to promote responsible data sharing.Genet Med advance online publication 15 December 2016Genetics in Medicine (2016); doi:10.1038/gim.2016.189. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 43 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 13 | 30% |
| United Kingdom | 6 | 14% |
| Canada | 6 | 14% |
| Belgium | 1 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 2% |
| Argentina | 1 | 2% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 2% |
| Bolivia, Plurinational State of | 1 | 2% |
| Greece | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 11 | 26% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 20 | 47% |
| Scientists | 17 | 40% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 9% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 66 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 10 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 14% |
| Researcher | 9 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 9% |
| Other | 6 | 9% |
| Unknown | 17 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 12 | 18% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 12 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 17% |
| Unknown | 17 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 32. 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 22 August 2022.
All research outputs
#1,245,121
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Genetics in Medicine
#388
of 2,943 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,024
of 421,129 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genetics in Medicine
#7
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,943 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 421,129 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.