| Title |
Multilevel Research and the Challenges of Implementing Genomic Medicine
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs, May 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgs003 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Muin J. Khoury, Ralph J. Coates, Mary L. Fennell, Russell E. Glasgow, Maren T. Scheuner, Sheri D. Schully, Marc S. Williams, Steven B. Clauser |
| Abstract |
Advances in genomics and related fields promise a new era of personalized medicine in the cancer care continuum. Nevertheless, there are fundamental challenges in integrating genomic medicine into cancer practice. We explore how multilevel research can contribute to implementation of genomic medicine. We first review the rapidly developing scientific discoveries in this field and the paucity of current applications that are ready for implementation in clinical and public health programs. We then define a multidisciplinary translational research agenda for successful integration of genomic medicine into policy and practice and consider challenges for successful implementation. We illustrate the agenda using the example of Lynch syndrome testing in newly diagnosed cases of colorectal cancer and cascade testing in relatives. We synthesize existing information in a framework for future multilevel research for integrating genomic medicine into the cancer care continuum. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 51 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 | 20 | 39% |
| United Kingdom | 6 | 12% |
| Canada | 2 | 4% |
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| Austria | 1 | 2% |
| Hong Kong | 1 | 2% |
| Mexico | 1 | 2% |
| Finland | 1 | 2% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 15 | 29% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 30 | 59% |
| Scientists | 15 | 29% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 6% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 1 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 121 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 2% |
| Canada | 2 | 2% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 115 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 24 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 22 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 8% |
| Other | 27 | 22% |
| Unknown | 11 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 37 | 31% |
| Social Sciences | 16 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 7% |
| Computer Science | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 27 | 22% |
| Unknown | 16 | 13% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 40. 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 22 June 2018.
All research outputs
#1,022,757
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs
#11
of 340 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,252
of 177,807 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs
#1
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 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 340 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 177,807 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them