↓ Skip to main content

Genomic medicine must reduce, not compound, health inequities: the case for hauora-enhancing genomic resources for New Zealand.

Overview of attention for article published in New Zealand Medical Journal, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
55 Mendeley
Title
Genomic medicine must reduce, not compound, health inequities: the case for hauora-enhancing genomic resources for New Zealand.
Published in
New Zealand Medical Journal, August 2018
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stephen P Robertson, Jennie Harre Hindmarsh, Sarah Berry, Vicky A Cameron, Murray P Cox, Ofa Dewes, Robert N Doughty, George Gray, Jessie C Jacobsen, Albert Laurence, Elizabeth Matisoo-Smith, Susan Morton, Andrew N Shelling, Dianne Sika-Paotonu, Anna Rolleston, Jonathan R Skinner, Russell G Snell, Andrew Sporle, Cristin Print, Tony R Merriman, Maui Hudson, Philip Wilcox

Abstract

Precision medicine seeks to draw on data from both individuals and populations across disparate domains to influence and support diagnosis, management and prevention in healthcare at the level of the individual patient and their family/whānau. Central to this initiative is incorporating the effects of the inherent variation that lies within genomes and can influence health outcomes. Identifying and interpreting such variation requires an accurate, valid and representative dataset to firstly define what variants are present and then assess the potential relevance for the health of a person, their family/whānau and the wider community to which they belong. Globally the variation embedded within genomes differs enormously and has been shaped by the size, constitution, historical origins and evolutionary history of their source populations. Māori, and more broadly Pacific peoples, differ substantially in terms of genomic variation compared to the more closely studied European and Asian populations. In the absence of accurate genomic information from Māori and Pacific populations, the precise interpretation of genomic data and the success and benefits of genomic medicine will be disproportionately less for those Māori and Pacific peoples. In this viewpoint article we, as a group of healthcare professionals, researchers and scientists, present a case for assembling genomic resources that catalogue the characteristics of the genomes of New Zealanders, with an emphasis on peoples of Māori and Polynesian ancestry, as a healthcare imperative. In proposing the creation of these resources, we note that their governance and management must be led by iwi and Māori and Pacific representatives. Assembling a genomic resource must be informed by cultural concepts and values most especially understanding that, at a physical and spiritual level, whakapapa is embodied within the DNA of a person. Therefore DNA and genomic data that connects to whakapapa (genealogy) is considered a taonga (something precious and significant), and its storage, utilisation and interpretation is a culturally significant activity. Furthermore, such resources are not proposed to primarily enable comparisons between those with Māori and broader Pacific ancestries and other Aotearoa peoples but to place an understanding of the genetic contributors to their health outcomes in a valid context. Ongoing oversight and governance of such taonga by Māori and Pacific representatives will maximise hauora (health) while also minimising the risk of misuse of this information.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 55 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 16%
Other 4 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 7%
Professor 4 7%
Student > Bachelor 3 5%
Other 11 20%
Unknown 20 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 8 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 7%
Psychology 3 5%
Other 10 18%
Unknown 21 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 26 June 2019.
All research outputs
#14,702,809
of 25,870,940 outputs
Outputs from New Zealand Medical Journal
#399
of 900 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#167,129
of 343,194 outputs
Outputs of similar age from New Zealand Medical Journal
#3
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,870,940 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 900 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 343,194 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 50% 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 has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.