↓ Skip to main content

Even modest prediction accuracy of genomic models can have large clinical utility

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Genetics, November 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 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
Even modest prediction accuracy of genomic models can have large clinical utility
Published in
Frontiers in Genetics, November 2014
DOI 10.3389/fgene.2014.00417
Pubmed ID
Authors

Emily J. Dhurandhar, Ana I. Vazquez, George A. Argyropoulos, David B. Allison

Abstract

Whole Genome Prediction (WGP) jointly fits thousands of SNPs into a regression model to yield estimates for the contribution of markers to the overall variance of a particular trait, and for their associations with that trait. To date, WGP has offered only modest prediction accuracy, but in some cases even modest prediction accuracy may be useful. We provide an illustration of this using a theoretical simulation that used WGP to predict weight loss after bariatric surgery with moderate accuracy (R (2) = 0.07) to assess the clinical utility of WGP despite these limitations. Prevention of Type 2 Diabetes (T2DM) post-surgery was considered the major outcome. Treating only patients above predefined threshold of predicted weight loss in our simulation, in the realistic context of finite resources for the surgery, significantly reduced lifetime risk of T2DM in the treatable population by selecting those most likely to succeed. Thus, our example illustrates how WGP may be clinically useful in some situations, and even with moderate accuracy, may provide a clear path for turning personalized medicine from theory to reality.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 28 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 25%
Student > Bachelor 4 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 11%
Student > Master 2 7%
Other 4 14%
Unknown 5 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 32%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 25%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 7%
Engineering 2 7%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 6 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 26 November 2019.
All research outputs
#12,906,644
of 22,772,779 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Genetics
#2,724
of 11,758 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#169,779
of 361,884 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Genetics
#44
of 108 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,772,779 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,758 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 361,884 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 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 108 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.