↓ Skip to main content

Direct to consumer testing in reproductive contexts – should health professionals be concerned?

Overview of attention for article published in Life Sciences, Society and Policy, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 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
Direct to consumer testing in reproductive contexts – should health professionals be concerned?
Published in
Life Sciences, Society and Policy, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s40504-014-0018-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Heather Skirton

Abstract

Direct to consumer genetic testing offered via the Internet has been available for over a decade. Initially most tests of this type were offered without the input of the consumer's own health professional. Ethical and practical concerns have been a raised over the use of such tests: these include fulfilling the requirement for informed consent, utility of results for health care management and the potential burden placed upon health services by people who have taken tests.These tests now have an application in reproductive healthcare. The advent of non-invasive prenatal testing has facilitated the genetic testing of the fetus using only a maternal blood sample. However, companies offering such tests, for example for aneuploidy, appear to be doing so based on a referral from the mother's health professional. Preconception or prenatal carrier testing for a range of autosomal recessive conditions can be purchased without the input of a health professional who knows the prospective parents. However, unless the appropriate mutations for the specific population are included in the test, results may create false reassurance. Paternity testing without the consent of the putative father is also available via the Internet, as are tests to ascertain the sex of the fetus, which may be used to select children of a specific gender.Direct-to-consumer tests may support prospective parents to identify genetic risk to their future children, however, it is important that they are aware of the possible limitations, as well as advantages, of these tests. National regulation may not prove effective in ensuring the safety of all individuals involved, therefore international pressure to ensure companies conform to Codes of Practice may be needed, especially in relation to tests that could influence reproductive decisions. However, health professionals have a duty to ensure they are sufficiently knowledgeable to enable them to guide patients appropriately.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
South Africa 1 2%
Unknown 48 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 24%
Researcher 10 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 20%
Other 5 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 6 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 38%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 10%
Psychology 4 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Other 9 18%
Unknown 6 12%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 19 May 2016.
All research outputs
#4,803,759
of 23,340,595 outputs
Outputs from Life Sciences, Society and Policy
#59
of 109 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,456
of 265,687 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Life Sciences, Society and Policy
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,340,595 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 109 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.7. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 265,687 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them