↓ Skip to main content

The futility of genomic counseling: essential role of electronic health records

Overview of attention for article published in Genome Medicine, May 2009
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
35 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 futility of genomic counseling: essential role of electronic health records
Published in
Genome Medicine, May 2009
DOI 10.1186/gm48
Pubmed ID
Authors

John Belmont, Amy L McGuire

Abstract

Technological advances over the past several years have dramatically reduced the cost of whole-genome sequencing. At the same time, understanding of the functional significance of genetic variation has advanced considerably. The routine generation of whole-genome sequence data for individual patients will soon be sufficiently cost-effective for widespread clinical integration. Yet, the clinical utility of whole-genome data is currently limited by an inability to effectively process, store, interpret and update genomic data, while at the same time protecting patient privacy. Enter the electronic health record. We propose that without the integration of a dynamic uniform electronic health record, counseling patients on the basis of genome-wide data will be futile.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 9%
United Kingdom 1 3%
Denmark 1 3%
Brazil 1 3%
Unknown 29 83%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 23%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Professor 3 9%
Student > Master 3 9%
Other 7 20%
Unknown 2 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 23%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 14%
Computer Science 5 14%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 6 17%