| Title |
Germline genome-editing research and its socioethical implications
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Trends in Molecular Medicine, June 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.molmed.2015.05.006 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tetsuya Ishii |
| Abstract |
Genetically modifying eggs, sperm, and zygotes ('germline' modification) can impact on the entire body of the resulting individual and on subsequent generations. With the advent of genome-editing technology, human germline gene modification is no longer theoretical. Owing to increasing concerns about human germline gene modification, a voluntary moratorium on human genome-editing research and/or the clinical application of human germline genome editing has recently been called for. However, whether such research should be suspended or encouraged warrants careful consideration. The present article reviews recent research on mammalian germline genome editing, discusses the importance of public dialogue on the socioethical implications of human germline genome-editing research, and considers the relevant guidelines and legislation in different countries. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 28 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 | 10 | 36% |
| Japan | 3 | 11% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 7% |
| Peru | 1 | 4% |
| France | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 11 | 39% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 16 | 57% |
| Scientists | 7 | 25% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 4 | 14% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 263 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 2 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Nigeria | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 259 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 78 | 30% |
| Student > Master | 44 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 35 | 13% |
| Researcher | 30 | 11% |
| Other | 9 | 3% |
| Other | 25 | 10% |
| Unknown | 42 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 68 | 26% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 54 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 34 | 13% |
| Social Sciences | 11 | 4% |
| Engineering | 7 | 3% |
| Other | 40 | 15% |
| Unknown | 49 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 37. 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 28 June 2020.
All research outputs
#1,091,025
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Trends in Molecular Medicine
#105
of 1,931 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,166
of 278,754 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trends in Molecular Medicine
#2
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 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 1,931 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 278,754 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.