↓ Skip to main content

Multi-disciplinary summit on genetics services for women with gynecologic cancers: A Society of Gynecologic Oncology White Paper

Overview of attention for article published in Gynecologic Oncology, August 2017
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 (81st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 Mendeley
Title
Multi-disciplinary summit on genetics services for women with gynecologic cancers: A Society of Gynecologic Oncology White Paper
Published in
Gynecologic Oncology, August 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.ygyno.2017.06.002
Pubmed ID
Authors

Leslie M. Randall, Bhavana Pothuri, Elizabeth M. Swisher, John P. Diaz, Adam Buchanan, Catherine T. Witkop, C. Bethan Powell, Ellen Blair Smith, Mark E. Robson, Jeff Boyd, Robert L. Coleman, Karen Lu

Abstract

To assess current practice, advise minimum standards, and identify educational gaps relevant to genetic screening, counseling, and testing of women affected by gynecologic cancers. The Society of Gynecologic Oncology (SGO) organized a multidisciplinary summit that included representatives from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), the American Society Clinical Oncology (ASCO), the National Society of Genetic Counselors (NSGC), and patient advocacy groups, BrightPink and Facing our Risk of Cancer Empowered (FORCE). Three subject areas were discussed: care delivery models for genetic testing, barriers to genetic testing, and educational opportunities for providers of genetic testing. The group endorsed current SGO, National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), and NSGC genetic testing guidelines for women affected with ovarian, tubal, peritoneal cancers, or DNA mismatch repair deficient endometrial cancer. Three main areas of unmet need were identified: timely and universal genetic testing for women with ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal cancers; education regarding minimum standards for genetic counseling and testing; and barriers to implementation of testing of both affected individuals as well as cascade testing of family members. Consensus building among all stakeholders resulted in an action plan to address gaps in education of gynecologic oncology providers and delivery of cancer genetics care.

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 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 54 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 13%
Other 7 13%
Researcher 6 11%
Student > Master 6 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 11%
Other 11 20%
Unknown 11 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 35%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 11%
Psychology 6 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 6%
Engineering 2 4%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 16 30%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 June 2017.
All research outputs
#1,372,633
of 12,203,170 outputs
Outputs from Gynecologic Oncology
#146
of 2,587 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,169
of 271,520 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Gynecologic Oncology
#11
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,203,170 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,587 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 271,520 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 70 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.