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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Rural-urban and racial-ethnic differences in awareness of direct-to-consumer genetic testing
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12889-018-5190-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ramzi G. Salloum, Thomas J. George, Natalie Silver, Merry-Jennifer Markham, Jaclyn M. Hall, Yi Guo, Jiang Bian, Elizabeth A. Shenkman |
| Abstract |
Access to direct-to-consumer genetic testing services has increased in recent years. However, disparities in knowledge and awareness of these services are not well documented. We examined awareness of genetic testing services by rural/urban and racial/ethnic status. Analyses were conducted using pooled cross-sectional data from 4 waves (2011-2014) of the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS). Descriptive statistics compared sample characteristics and information sources by rural/urban residence. Logistic regression was used to examine the relationship between geography, racial/ethnic status, and awareness of genetic testing, controlling for sociodemographic characteristics. Of 13,749 respondents, 16.7% resided in rural areas, 13.8% were Hispanic, and 10.1% were non-Hispanic black. Rural residents were less likely than urban residents to report awareness of genetic testing (OR = 0.74, 95% CI = 0.63-0.87). Compared with non-Hispanic whites, racial/ethnic minorities were less likely to be aware of genetic testing: Hispanic (OR = 0.68, 95% CI = 0.56-0.82); and non-Hispanic black (OR = 0.74, 95% CI = 0.61-0.90). Rural-urban and racial-ethnic differences exist in awareness of direct-to-consumer genetic testing. These differences may translate into disparities in the uptake of genetic testing, health behavior change, and disease prevention through precision and personalized medicine. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Scientists | 2 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 62 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 12 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 10 | 16% |
| Unknown | 14 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 10 | 16% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 16% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 8% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 9 | 15% |
| Unknown | 18 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 27 February 2018.
All research outputs
#7,014,244
of 23,025,074 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#7,395
of 14,997 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#122,901
of 330,329 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#207
of 294 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,025,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,997 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. 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 330,329 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 294 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.