↓ Skip to main content

Laboratory and clinical genomic data sharing is crucial to improving genetic health care: a position statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics

Overview of attention for article published in Genetics in Medicine, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#19 of 2,354)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
65 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 Mendeley
Title
Laboratory and clinical genomic data sharing is crucial to improving genetic health care: a position statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics
Published in
Genetics in Medicine, January 2017
DOI 10.1038/gim.2016.196
Pubmed ID
Authors

ACMG Board of Directors

Abstract

Disclaimer: These recommendations are designed primarily as an educational resource for medical geneticists and other health-care providers, to help them provide quality medical genetic services. Adherence to these recommendations does not necessarily assure a successful medical outcome. These recommendations should not be considered inclusive of all proper procedures and tests or exclusive of other procedures and tests that are reasonably directed to obtaining the same results. In determining the propriety of any specific procedure or test, the geneticist should apply his or her own professional judgment to the specific clinical circumstances presented by the individual patient or specimen. It may be prudent, however, to document in the patient's record the rationale for any significant deviation from these recommendations.Genet Med advance online publication 05 January 2017Genetics in Medicine (2017); doi:10.1038/gim.2016.196.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 256 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 76 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 18%
Other 12 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 14%
Student > Master 8 11%
Student > Bachelor 7 9%
Other 13 17%
Unknown 11 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 22 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 8%
Social Sciences 5 7%
Computer Science 5 7%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 14 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 203. 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 27 June 2018.
All research outputs
#104,645
of 17,658,188 outputs
Outputs from Genetics in Medicine
#19
of 2,354 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,904
of 395,274 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genetics in Medicine
#2
of 60 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,658,188 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,354 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.9. 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 395,274 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 60 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.