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 |
GM insect pests under the Brazilian regulatory framework: development and perspectives
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Proceedings, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12919-018-0107-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Paulo P. Andrade, Marília Andreza da Silva Ferreira, Marta Silva Muniz, Amaro de Casto Lira-Neto |
| Abstract |
The emergence of new technologies for genetic modification has broadened the range of possible new products. The regulations of many countries that could benefit from these new products may not be prepared to assess risks and enable science-based decision-making. This is especially acute in the case of genetically modified insects with potential use in public health and agriculture. Modifications of the regulatory framework, sometimes necessary to allow a proper risk assessment of products from new technologies, are strongly influenced by political decisions derived from the balance of power and interest among stakeholders. This article discusses the genesis of the Brazilian regulatory framework, its applicability for the risk assessment of genetically modified insects and the scenarios that have shaped the two biosafety laws that established the basis for the use of modern biotechnology in the country. It is concluded that, for the adoption of the new technologies, it is important to carefully navigate the political tensions by seeking the engagement and empowerment of stakeholders supporting science-based decision-making in order to gather the necessary support for adoption of risk assessment as the basis for final decisions, allowing the use of new technologies. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 25 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 24% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 24% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 16% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 8% |
| Professor | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 3 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 32% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 5 | 20% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 12% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 12% |
| Unknown | 4 | 16% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 17 September 2018.
All research outputs
#3,170,806
of 23,096,849 outputs
Outputs from BMC Proceedings
#36
of 377 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#65,052
of 329,151 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Proceedings
#6
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,096,849 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 377 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 329,151 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.