↓ Skip to main content

ACOG Committee Opinion No. 727 Summary: Cascade Testing: Testing Women For Known Hereditary Genetic Mutations Associated With Cancer

Overview of attention for article published in Obstetrics & Gynecology, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Readers on

mendeley
14 Mendeley
Title
ACOG Committee Opinion No. 727 Summary: Cascade Testing: Testing Women For Known Hereditary Genetic Mutations Associated With Cancer
Published in
Obstetrics & Gynecology, January 2018
DOI 10.1097/aog.0000000000002451
Pubmed ID
Abstract

"Cascade testing" refers to the performance of genetic counseling and testing in blood relatives of individuals who have been identified with specific genetic mutations. Testing protocols and other interventions may save lives and improve health and quality of life for these family members. Obstetrician-gynecologists should know who is eligible for cascade testing and should use all available resources to ensure that cascade testing is offered and occurs in a timely manner. Despite the clear health benefits for specific populations and individuals, obstetrician-gynecologists should be aware of the potential barriers to cascade testing and should know which options can help patients overcome those barriers. Such barriers, however, may be overcome with health care provider awareness and participation in local and state initiatives to improve implementation of cascade testing. Resources (available within federal and state agencies, professional societies, and in advocacy and community groups) are critical to the successful implementation of cascade testing. This Committee Opinion focuses specifically on cascade testing and the role of the obstetrician-gynecologist in clinical and public health efforts to increase identification of women with hereditary cancer syndromes.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 29%
Student > Bachelor 3 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 7%
Professor 1 7%
Student > Master 1 7%
Other 2 14%
Unknown 2 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 14%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 7%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 7%
Social Sciences 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Unknown 3 21%

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 22 December 2017.
All research outputs
#9,858,222
of 12,341,991 outputs
Outputs from Obstetrics & Gynecology
#5,223
of 5,854 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#248,188
of 347,151 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Obstetrics & Gynecology
#92
of 94 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,341,991 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 5,854 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% 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 347,151 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 94 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.