| Title |
The Public and the Gene-Editing Revolution
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
New England Journal of Medicine, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1056/nejmp1602010 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Robert J Blendon, Mary T Gorski, John M Benson |
| Abstract |
Polls conducted over recent decades give a sense of what the U.S. public thinks about gene therapy and gene editing in adults, children, and human embryos or germline cells, as well as of whether and for what reasons Americans would consider undergoing genetic testing. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 70 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 | 27 | 39% |
| United Kingdom | 6 | 9% |
| Netherlands | 2 | 3% |
| Canada | 2 | 3% |
| Mexico | 2 | 3% |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 1% |
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| Germany | 1 | 1% |
| Kenya | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 6 | 9% |
| Unknown | 21 | 30% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 37 | 53% |
| Scientists | 19 | 27% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 10 | 14% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 4 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 66 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 16% |
| Researcher | 9 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 12 | 18% |
| Unknown | 10 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 14 | 21% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 12% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 12% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 10% |
| Engineering | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 15 | 22% |
| Unknown | 11 | 16% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 489. 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 08 November 2023.
All research outputs
#53,567
of 25,392,205 outputs
Outputs from New England Journal of Medicine
#1,733
of 32,453 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,018
of 312,827 outputs
Outputs of similar age from New England Journal of Medicine
#30
of 318 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,392,205 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 32,453 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 121.9. 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 312,827 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 318 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.