↓ Skip to main content

American Association for Cancer Research

Article Metrics

A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial of the Feasibility, Acceptability, and Impact of Giving Information on Personalized Genomic Risk of Melanoma to the Public

Overview of attention for article published in Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
8 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 Mendeley
Title
A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial of the Feasibility, Acceptability, and Impact of Giving Information on Personalized Genomic Risk of Melanoma to the Public
Published in
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, October 2016
DOI 10.1158/1055-9965.epi-16-0395
Pubmed ID
Authors

Amelia K. Smit, David Espinoza, Ainsley J. Newson, Rachael L. Morton, Georgina Fenton, Lucinda Freeman, Kate Dunlop, Phyllis N. Butow, Matthew H. Law, Michael G. Kimlin, Louise A. Keogh, Suzanne J. Dobbinson, Judy Kirk, Peter A. Kanetsky, Graham J. Mann, Anne E. Cust

Abstract

Communication of personalised melanoma genomic risk information may improve melanoma prevention behaviours. We evaluated the feasibility and acceptability of communicating personalised genomic risk of melanoma to the public, and its preliminary impact on behaviours and psychosocial outcomes. 118 people aged 22-69 years provided a saliva sample and were randomised to the control (non-personalised educational materials), or intervention (personalised booklet presenting melanoma genomic risk as absolute and relative risks and a risk category based on variants in 21 genes, telephone-based genetic counselling, and non-personalised educational materials). Intention-to-treat analyses overall and by risk category were conducted using ANCOVA adjusted for baseline values. Consent to participate was 41%, 99% were successfully genotyped, 92% completed 3-month follow-up. Intervention participants reported high satisfaction with the personalised booklet (mean=8.6, SD=1.6; on a 0-10 scale) and genetic counselling (mean=8.1, SD=2.2). No significant behavioural effects at 3-months follow-up were identified between intervention and control groups overall: objectively-measured standard erythemal doses per day (-16%, 95% confidence interval (CI): -43%, 24%), sun protection index (0.05, 95% CI: -0.07, 0.18). There was increased confidence identifying melanoma at 3-months (0.40, 95% CI: 0.10, 0.69). Stratified by risk category, effect sizes for intentional tanning and some individual sun protection items appeared stronger for the average-risk group. There were no appreciable group differences in skin cancer related worry or psychological distress. Our results demonstrate feasibility and acceptability of providing personalised genomic risk of melanoma to the public. Genomic risk information has potential as a melanoma prevention strategy.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 70 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 19%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 13%
Researcher 8 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 9%
Other 5 7%
Other 14 20%
Unknown 15 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 24%
Psychology 11 16%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 6%
Social Sciences 4 6%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 16 23%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 69. 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 29 September 2021.
All research outputs
#410,369
of 19,026,578 outputs
Outputs from Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
#169
of 4,080 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,437
of 280,710 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
#6
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,026,578 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,080 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 280,710 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.