↓ Skip to main content

Birth Defects Registries in the Genomics Era: Challenges and Opportunities for Developing Countries

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Pediatrics, June 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 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
Birth Defects Registries in the Genomics Era: Challenges and Opportunities for Developing Countries
Published in
Frontiers in Pediatrics, June 2014
DOI 10.3389/fped.2014.00060
Pubmed ID
Authors

Meow-Keong Thong

Abstract

Birth defects or congenital anomalies are one of the major causes of disability in developed and developing countries. Data on birth defects from population-based studies originating from developing countries are lacking. Increasingly, there is a shift to genetic testing and genomics study of birth defects. However, the translation from bench findings to bedside medicine has been muted. There is a need to address this imbalance where congenital anomalies remained the top etiology for neonatal mortality in developing countries. To build capacity in low resource countries, there is a need for accurate collection and ascertainment of birth defects in developing countries. The systematic collection and analysis of data on major birth defects using birth defects registries (BDRs) are an integral part of all clinical genetic services. Healthcare planners in developing countries must be aware of the advantages and limitations of BDRs. Despite the advent of the genomics era, BDRs are essential to the planning and developing care and prevention services at local and national levels, particularly in low resource or developing countries.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 43 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 20%
Student > Bachelor 7 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 11%
Researcher 4 9%
Student > Postgraduate 2 5%
Other 10 23%
Unknown 7 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 43%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 9 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 16 June 2014.
All research outputs
#18,373,576
of 22,757,090 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pediatrics
#3,314
of 5,916 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#147,843
of 206,472 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pediatrics
#17
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,757,090 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,916 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 206,472 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.