↓ Skip to main content

Genomic newborn screening: public health policy considerations and recommendations

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Genomics, February 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 889)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
30 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
137 Mendeley
Title
Genomic newborn screening: public health policy considerations and recommendations
Published in
BMC Medical Genomics, February 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12920-017-0247-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jan M. Friedman, Martina C. Cornel, Aaron J. Goldenberg, Karla J. Lister, Karine Sénécal, Danya F. Vears

Abstract

The use of genome-wide (whole genome or exome) sequencing for population-based newborn screening presents an opportunity to detect and treat or prevent many more serious early-onset health conditions than is possible today. The Paediatric Task Team of the Global Alliance for Genomics and Health's Regulatory and Ethics Working Group reviewed current understanding and concerns regarding the use of genomic technologies for population-based newborn screening and developed, by consensus, eight recommendations for clinicians, clinical laboratory scientists, and policy makers. Before genome-wide sequencing can be implemented in newborn screening programs, its clinical utility and cost-effectiveness must be demonstrated, and the ability to distinguish disease-causing and benign variants of all genes screened must be established. In addition, each jurisdiction needs to resolve ethical and policy issues regarding the disclosure of incidental or secondary findings to families and ownership, appropriate storage and sharing of genomic data. The best interests of children should be the basis for all decisions regarding the implementation of genomic newborn screening.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 30 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 137 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 137 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 31 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 14%
Researcher 18 13%
Student > Bachelor 12 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 7%
Other 23 17%
Unknown 24 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 35 26%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 29 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 7%
Social Sciences 4 3%
Other 20 15%
Unknown 29 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 30. 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 August 2020.
All research outputs
#781,266
of 16,810,341 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Genomics
#19
of 889 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,399
of 265,459 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Genomics
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,810,341 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 889 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. 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 265,459 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them