| Title |
Effectiveness of the Genomics ADvISER decision aid for the selection of secondary findings from genomic sequencing: a randomized clinical trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Genetics in Medicine, December 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1038/s41436-019-0702-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yvonne Bombard, Marc Clausen, Salma Shickh, Chloe Mighton, Selina Casalino, Theresa H. M. Kim, Sarah M. Muir, Lindsay Carlsson, Nancy Baxter, Adena Scheer, Christine Elser, Andrea Eisen, Seema Panchal, Tracy Graham, Melyssa Aronson, Carolyn Piccinin, Talia Mancuso, Kara Semotiuk, Michael Evans, June C. Carroll, Kenneth Offit, Mark Robson, Jada G. Hamilton, Emily Glogowski, Kasmintan Schrader, Raymond H. Kim, Jordan Lerner-Ellis, Kevin E. Thorpe, Andreas Laupacis |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 36 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 | 9 | 25% |
| Canada | 7 | 19% |
| Australia | 2 | 6% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 6% |
| Colombia | 2 | 6% |
| Taiwan | 1 | 3% |
| Tanzania, United Republic of | 1 | 3% |
| Ireland | 1 | 3% |
| Spain | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 8 | 22% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 17 | 47% |
| Scientists | 14 | 39% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 8% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 50 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 6 | 12% |
| Unknown | 24 | 48% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 16% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Unknown | 26 | 52% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 49. 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 18 January 2024.
All research outputs
#850,883
of 25,387,668 outputs
Outputs from Genetics in Medicine
#239
of 2,945 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,474
of 474,422 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genetics in Medicine
#7
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,387,668 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,945 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 474,422 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 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.