↓ Skip to main content

Known unknowns: building an ethics of uncertainty into genomic medicine

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Genomics, January 2016
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 (#18 of 879)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
38 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
48 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Known unknowns: building an ethics of uncertainty into genomic medicine
Published in
BMC Medical Genomics, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12920-016-0219-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ainsley J. Newson, Samantha J. Leonard, Alison Hall, Clara L. Gaff, Newson, Ainsley J, Leonard, Samantha J, Hall, Alison, Gaff, Clara L

Abstract

Genomic testing has reached the point where, technically at least, it can be cheaper to undertake panel-, exome- or whole genome testing than it is to sequence a single gene. An attribute of these approaches is that information gleaned will often have uncertain significance. In addition to the challenges this presents for pre-test counseling and informed consent, a further consideration emerges over how - ethically - we should conceive of and respond to this uncertainty. To date, the ethical aspects of uncertainty in genomics have remained under-explored. In this paper, we draft a conceptual and ethical response to the question of how to conceive of and respond to uncertainty in genomic medicine. After introducing the problem, we articulate a concept of 'genomic uncertainty'. Drawing on this, together with exemplar clinical cases and related empirical literature, we then critique the presumption that uncertainty is always problematic and something to be avoided, or eradicated. We conclude by outlining an 'ethics of genomic uncertainty'; describing how we might handle uncertainty in genomic medicine. This involves fostering resilience, welfare, autonomy and solidarity. Uncertainty will be an inherent aspect of clinical practice in genomics for some time to come. Genomic testing should not be offered with the explicit aim to reduce uncertainty. Rather, uncertainty should be appraised, adapted to and communicated about as part of the process of offering and providing genomic information.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 38 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 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 63 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 6%
Other 3 5%
Professor 2 3%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 3%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 42 67%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 6%
Philosophy 1 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 43 68%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 32. 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 02 November 2017.
All research outputs
#733,657
of 16,577,281 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Genomics
#18
of 879 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,982
of 267,281 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Genomics
#1
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,577,281 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 879 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 267,281 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 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 99% of its contemporaries.