↓ Skip to main content

The hundred person wellness project and Google’s baseline study: medical revolution or unnecessary and potentially harmful over-testing?

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, January 2015
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 (88th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
18 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Readers on

mendeley
73 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
The hundred person wellness project and Google’s baseline study: medical revolution or unnecessary and potentially harmful over-testing?
Published in
BMC Medicine, January 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12916-014-0239-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eleftherios P Diamandis

Abstract

The Hundred Person Wellness Project is an ambitious pilot undertaking, which aims to intensely monitor 100 individuals over 10 months. Patients with abnormal findings will be treated, in hopes that this early intervention will avoid, or delay, symptomatic disease. Google's "Baseline Study" is of similar scope and will enroll 10,000 people over 2 to 3 years. I here speculate that these approaches will likely not be effective in preventing disease, but instead, lead to unnecessary and potentially harmful interventions. Examples from the cancer screening experience over the last 30 years are provided, which show that intensive testing may uncover indolent disease or incidental findings which, when treated, may cause more harm than good. Additional examples show that aggressive treatments for cancer and other diseases do not always lead to better patient outcomes. I conclude that the recent advances in omics provide us with unprecedented opportunities for high content clinical testing, but such testing should be used with caution to avoid the harmful consequences of over-diagnosis and over-treatment. Despite the detailed rebuttals by Hood and colleagues in another commentary in BMC Medicine, time will show the actual benefits and harms of these ambitious initiatives.Please see related commentary: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12916-014-0238-7.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 70 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 14%
Other 5 7%
Student > Bachelor 5 7%
Student > Master 5 7%
Other 16 22%
Unknown 15 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 16%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 14%
Computer Science 3 4%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Other 12 16%
Unknown 20 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 20 September 2016.
All research outputs
#3,068,489
of 24,393,299 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#1,852
of 3,756 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,542
of 361,092 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#36
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,393,299 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,756 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 45.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 361,092 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.