↓ Skip to main content

Epigenetic Discrimination: Emerging Applications of Epigenetics Pointing to the Limitations of Policies Against Genetic Discrimination

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Genetics, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
10 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
16 X users
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
35 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 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
Epigenetic Discrimination: Emerging Applications of Epigenetics Pointing to the Limitations of Policies Against Genetic Discrimination
Published in
Frontiers in Genetics, June 2018
DOI 10.3389/fgene.2018.00202
Pubmed ID
Authors

Charles Dupras, Lingqiao Song, Katie M. Saulnier, Yann Joly

Abstract

Over more than two decades, various policies have been adopted worldwide to restrict the use of individual genetic information for non-medical reasons by third parties and prevent 'genetic discrimination'. In this paper, we bring attention to the growing interest for individual epigenetic information by insurers and forensic scientists. We question whether such interest could lead to 'epigenetic discrimination' - the differential adverse treatment or abusive profiling of individuals or groups based on their actual or presumed epigenetic characteristics - and argue that we might already be facing the limitations of recently adopted normative approaches against genetic discrimination. First, we highlight some similarities and differences between genetic and epigenetic modifications, and stress potential challenges to regulating epigenetic discrimination. Second, we argue that most existing normative approaches against genetic discrimination fall short in providing oversight into the field of epigenetics. We conclude with a call for discussion on the issue, and the development of comprehensive and forward-looking preventive strategies against epigenetic discrimination.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 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 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 59 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 24%
Student > Bachelor 10 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Researcher 3 5%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 14 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 16 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 12%
Social Sciences 5 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 7%
Environmental Science 2 3%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 15 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 86. 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 24 May 2023.
All research outputs
#496,752
of 25,552,933 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Genetics
#72
of 13,758 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,839
of 342,590 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Genetics
#3
of 131 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,552,933 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 13,758 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 342,590 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 131 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 98% of its contemporaries.