| Title |
Implementing Precision Medicine: The Ethical Challenges
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Trends in Pharmacological Sciences, December 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.tips.2016.11.007 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Diane M. Korngiebel, Kenneth E. Thummel, Wylie Burke |
| Abstract |
Precision medicine aims to individualize care by understanding differences in genetics, lifestyle, and environment. Pharmacogenomics and cancer genetics represent two promising areas for this approach. Pharmacogenomic tests have the potential to direct drug prescribing to increase safety and effectiveness because individuals vary on a genetic basis in their response to many drugs. Similarly, tests to identify people with an inherited cancer risk can guide prevention. For both, a few tests have entered clinical practice and more are under development. Implementation challenges include the limited evidence base available to guide clinical use and the lack of data from diverse populations. Accordingly, ongoing research should prioritize procedures that enhance the trustworthiness of clinical practice guidelines and create decision support for clinicians and patients that address their needs and accommodate flexibility. Each step involves choices with ethical implications. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 | 3 | 43% |
| Spain | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 3 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 43% |
| Scientists | 3 | 43% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 182 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 182 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 27 | 15% |
| Researcher | 25 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 18 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 8% |
| Other | 12 | 7% |
| Other | 36 | 20% |
| Unknown | 49 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 37 | 20% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 22 | 12% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 16 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 10 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 10 | 5% |
| Other | 36 | 20% |
| Unknown | 51 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 27 July 2020.
All research outputs
#3,312,772
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Trends in Pharmacological Sciences
#394
of 2,406 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#61,086
of 420,153 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trends in Pharmacological Sciences
#11
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,406 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 420,153 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.