| Title |
Gene patents still alive and kicking: their impact on provision of genetic testing for long QT syndrome in the Canadian public health-care system
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Genetics in Medicine, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1038/gim.2017.43 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sarah E Ali-Khan, E Richard Gold |
| Abstract |
PurposeAlthough the Supreme Court of the United States limited their availability in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, gene patents remain important around the world. We examine the situation in Canada, where gene patents continue to exist, in light of recent litigation relating to familial long QT syndrome (LQTS).MethodsWe conducted in-depth semistructured interviews with 25 stakeholders across five Canadian provinces and supplemented this with a case analysis of the litigation.ResultsThe majority of LQTS testing was carried out outside Canada. Rising costs prompted several provinces to attempt to repatriate testing. However, LQTS gene patents stymied efforts, particularly in provinces where testing was more centralized, increasing costs and lowering innovation. It was in this context that a hospital launched a test case against the LQTS patents, resulting in a novel agreement to free Canadian hospitals from the effects of patents.ConclusionOur analysis reveals a rapidly evolving genetic test provision landscape under pressure from gene patents, strained budgets and poor collaboration. The litigation resulted in a blueprint for free public use of gene patents throughout Canada's health-care system, but it will only have value if governments are proactive in its use.GENETICS in MEDICINE advance online publication, 11 May 2017; doi:10.1038/gim.2017.43. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 3 | 23% |
| United States | 3 | 23% |
| Italy | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 6 | 46% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 62% |
| Scientists | 3 | 23% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 15% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 24 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 21% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 5 | 21% |
| Unknown | 6 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 4 | 17% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 17% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 13% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 8% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 17% |
| Unknown | 6 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 10 April 2021.
All research outputs
#1,916,550
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Genetics in Medicine
#662
of 2,945 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,873
of 325,438 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genetics in Medicine
#13
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,945 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 77% 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 325,438 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 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 74% of its contemporaries.