↓ Skip to main content

Who Pays? Coverage Challenges for Cardiovascular Genetic Testing in U.S. Patients

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Who Pays? Coverage Challenges for Cardiovascular Genetic Testing in U.S. Patients
Published in
Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine, May 2016
DOI 10.3389/fcvm.2016.00014
Pubmed ID
Authors

Katherine G. Spoonamore, Nicole M. Johnson

Abstract

Inherited cardiovascular (CV) conditions are common, and comprehensive care of affected families often involves genetic testing. When the clinical presentations of these conditions overlap, genetic testing may clarify diagnoses, etiologies, and treatments in symptomatic individuals and facilitate the identification of asymptomatic, at-risk relatives, allowing for often life-saving preventative care. Although some professional society guidelines on inherited cardiac conditions include genetic testing recommendations, they quickly become outdated owing to the rapid expansion and use of such testing. Currently, these guidelines primarily discuss the benefits of targeted genetic testing for identifying at-risk relatives. Although most insurance policies acknowledge the benefit and the necessity of this testing, many exclude coverage for testing altogether or are vague about coverage for testing in probands, which is imperative if clinicians are to have the best chance of accurately identifying pathogenic variant(s) in a family. In response to uncertainties about coverage, many commercial CV genetic testing laboratories have shouldered the burden of working directly with commercial payers and protecting patients/institutions from out-of-pocket costs. As a result, many clinicians are unaware that payer coverage policies may not match professional recommendations for CV genetic testing. This conundrum has left patients, clinicians, payers, and laboratories at an impasse when determining the best path forward for meaningful and sustainable testing. Herein, we discuss the need for all involved parties to recognize their common goals in this process, which should motivate collaboration in changing existing frameworks and creating more sustainable access to genetic information for families with inherited CV conditions.

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 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 30 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 23%
Other 4 13%
Student > Postgraduate 4 13%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 10%
Other 5 17%
Unknown 4 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 33%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 23%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 7%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 7 23%
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 10 June 2016.
All research outputs
#12,547,096
of 22,675,759 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine
#1,221
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#160,968
of 338,556 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine
#5
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,675,759 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,554 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 338,556 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 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.