↓ Skip to main content

Alternate Service Delivery Models in Cancer Genetic Counseling: A Mini-Review

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
11 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
120 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
Alternate Service Delivery Models in Cancer Genetic Counseling: A Mini-Review
Published in
Frontiers in oncology, May 2016
DOI 10.3389/fonc.2016.00120
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adam Hudson Buchanan, Alanna Kulchak Rahm, Janet L. Williams

Abstract

Demand for cancer genetic counseling has grown rapidly in recent years as germline genomic information has become increasingly incorporated into cancer care, and the field has entered the public consciousness through high-profile celebrity publications. Increased demand and existing variability in the availability of trained cancer genetics clinicians place a priority on developing and evaluating alternate service delivery models for genetic counseling. This mini-review summarizes the state of science regarding service delivery models, such as telephone counseling, telegenetics, and group counseling. Research on comparative effectiveness of these models in traditional individual, in-person genetic counseling has been promising for improving access to care in a manner acceptable to patients. Yet, it has not fully evaluated the short- and long-term patient- and system-level outcomes that will help answer the question of whether these models achieve the same beneficial psychosocial and behavioral outcomes as traditional cancer genetic counseling. We propose a research agenda focused on comparative effectiveness of available service delivery models and how to match models to patients and practice settings. Only through this rigorous research can clinicians and systems find the optimal balance of clinical quality, ready and secure access to care, and financial sustainability. Such research will be integral to achieving the promise of genomic medicine in oncology.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 120 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 120 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 16%
Researcher 13 11%
Other 9 8%
Student > Postgraduate 8 7%
Student > Bachelor 8 7%
Other 26 22%
Unknown 37 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 32 27%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 15 13%
Psychology 7 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Other 16 13%
Unknown 40 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 May 2020.
All research outputs
#2,732,984
of 25,604,262 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#680
of 22,741 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,785
of 327,844 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#5
of 92 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,604,262 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,741 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 327,844 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 92 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 94% of its contemporaries.