| Title |
Genetic Testing between Private and Public Interests: Some Legal and Ethical Reflections
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Public Health, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpubh.2018.00008 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Judit Sándor |
| Abstract |
In Europe, there is a wide variety of genetic tests that various private companies offer to patients or to consumers. More and more people have become curious about their genetic predisposition and susceptibility. Most public health-care systems, however, are not adequately prepared for responding to these new demands and to the results of these genetic tests as, quite often, there is no available therapy for the identified genetic condition. This discrepancy between the newly emerging expectations and the insufficient responses contributes to a further rift between the public and private sectors of health care. Individual genetic test results may also trigger the need for personalized medicine and may open up a competition between the two fields in offering further genetic tests and medical exams. Pro-active patients may need a different kind of information on genetic tests and their implications. In this context, how should the public health system deal with the challenges of private testing? Will private genetic testing transform health care from a solidarity-based system to an individualistic one? In this paper, I would like to explore the emerging legal and ethical issues related to genetic testing and the relevant legal framework that has developed so far. In the conclusion, I will examine the possibilities of further legal development. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Uruguay | 1 | 14% |
| Spain | 1 | 14% |
| Australia | 1 | 14% |
| Canada | 1 | 14% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 2 | 29% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 71% |
| Scientists | 1 | 14% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 32 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 16% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 5 | 16% |
| Unknown | 8 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 19% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 4 | 13% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 5 | 16% |
| Unknown | 10 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 30 March 2018.
All research outputs
#7,007,374
of 23,650,645 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#2,352
of 11,336 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#139,420
of 443,027 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#48
of 99 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,650,645 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,336 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 443,027 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 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 99 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 52% of its contemporaries.