↓ Skip to main content

From Newborn Screening to Population Health Research: Implementation of the Michigan BioTrust for Health.

Overview of attention for article published in Public Health Reports (1896-1970), September 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 Mendeley
Title
From Newborn Screening to Population Health Research: Implementation of the Michigan BioTrust for Health.
Published in
Public Health Reports (1896-1970), September 2013
Pubmed ID
Authors

Langbo C, Bach J, Kleyn M, Downes FP

Abstract

In June 2009, the Michigan Department of Community Health launched the Michigan BioTrust for Health to improve preservation and utility of residual dried blood spots from newborn screening (NBS) for biomedical research while maintaining public support and integrity of NBS. In this article, we chronicle implementation of the BioTrust and document its impact on NBS. Overall, the percentage of new parents who consent to possible future research use of their children's dried blood spots through the BioTrust has remained consistent with previous public opinion surveys. No significant increase in refusal of NBS has been observed despite increased publicity. There was, however, a slight increase in requests to destroy samples following completion of NBS, indicating readily accessible opt-out information. Given adequate training and cooperation of birthing hospital staff, as well as outreach education for parents and health-care providers, we conclude it is possible to implement a biobanking initiative without adversely impacting NBS.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 5%
Unknown 20 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 29%
Student > Bachelor 2 10%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Other 5 24%
Unknown 5 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 33%
Social Sciences 4 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 10%
Sports and Recreations 1 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 6 29%

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 09 September 2013.
All research outputs
#3,069,262
of 4,507,280 outputs
Outputs from Public Health Reports (1896-1970)
#423
of 556 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#64,231
of 94,701 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Public Health Reports (1896-1970)
#3
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,507,280 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 556 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 94,701 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.