| Title |
A systematic literature review of individuals’ perspectives on privacy and genetic information in the United States
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, October 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0204417 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ellen W. Clayton, Colin M. Halverson, Nila A. Sathe, Bradley A. Malin |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 52 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 | 12 | 23% |
| Switzerland | 6 | 12% |
| United Kingdom | 4 | 8% |
| South Africa | 1 | 2% |
| France | 1 | 2% |
| Brazil | 1 | 2% |
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| Poland | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 24 | 46% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 33 | 63% |
| Scientists | 15 | 29% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 6% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 131 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 131 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 18 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 16 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 8% |
| Other | 15 | 11% |
| Unknown | 42 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 10 | 8% |
| Computer Science | 10 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 9 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 35 | 27% |
| Unknown | 47 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 134. 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 27 April 2021.
All research outputs
#313,050
of 25,641,627 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#4,460
of 223,826 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,629
of 364,323 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#78
of 3,315 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,641,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 223,826 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 364,323 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,315 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 97% of its contemporaries.