| Title |
Your DNA, Your Say
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The New Bioethics, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1080/20502877.2017.1314890 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Anna Middleton |
| Abstract |
Genomic and medical data sharing is pivotal if the promise of genomic medicine is to be fully realised. Social scientists working in the genomics arena ask the public 'how is the technology working for you?' Empirical studies on attitudes, values and beliefs are incredibly valuable; they offer a voice from those who are, or will be, directly affected. This is paramount if personalised medicine is to be truly personal. An International attitude study, Your DNA, Your Say, uses film to provide background information and an online survey to gather public views on donating one's own personal DNA and medical data for use by others. In this paper the rationale to the project is introduced together with an overview of the survey and film design. The project has been translated into multiple languages and the results will be used in policy for the Global Alliance for Genomics and Health. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 Kingdom | 5 | 63% |
| Mauritius | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 2 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 88% |
| Scientists | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 56 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 12 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 11% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 13% |
| Unknown | 11 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 18 | 32% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 16% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 14% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 4% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Unknown | 12 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 25 May 2017.
All research outputs
#6,623,520
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from The New Bioethics
#81
of 237 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#103,934
of 314,884 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The New Bioethics
#8
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 237 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 314,884 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.