Genome Medicine

Description

  • Impact factor
    4.94
  • 5-year impact
    3.54
  • Cited half-life
    2.70
  • Immediacy index
    0.71
  • Eigenfactor
    0.01
  • Article influence
    1.50
  • ISSN
    1756-994X

Publications in this journal

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In the US, colorectal cancer is the fourth most common cancer and the second most deadly. Screening is recommended, not only to reduce mortality, but to prevent cancer by detecting precancerous polyps. Many screening methods are available now, and newer methods based on molecular markers show promise for the future.
    Genome Medicine 06/2014; 6(43).
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Transformation and clonal proliferation of T-cells infected with human T-cell leukemia virus type-I (HTLV-1) cause adult T-cell leukemia. We took advantage of next-generation sequencing technology to develop and internally validate a new methodology for isolating integration sites and estimating the number of cells in each HTLV-1-infected clone (clone size). Initial analysis was performed with DNA samples from infected individuals. We then used appropriate controls with known integration sites and clonality status to confirm the accuracy of our system, which indeed had the least errors among the currently available techniques. Results suggest potential clinical and biological applications of the new method.
    Genome Medicine 06/2014; 6:46.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Recent epigenome-wide association studies have indicated a potential role for epigenetic variation in the etiology of complex human diseases. However, one major challenge is to distinguish true epigenetic variation from changes caused by differences in cellular composition between the disease and non-disease state, a problem that is particularly relevant when analyzing whole blood. For studies with large numbers of samples, it can be expensive and very time consuming to perform cell sorting, and it is often not clear which is the correct cell type to profile. Two recently published papers have attempted to address this confounding issue using bioinformatics.
    Genome Medicine 03/2014; 6(23).
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The role of patient engagement as an important risk factor for healthcare outcomes has not been well established. The objective of this article was to systematically review the relationship between patient engagement and health outcomes in chronic disease to determine whether patient engagement should be quantified as an important risk factor in health risk appraisals to enhance the practice of personalized medicine. A systematic review of prospective clinical trials conducted between January 1993 and December 2012 was performed. Articles were identified through a medical librarian-conducted multi-term search of Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases. Additional studies were obtained from the references of meta-analyses and systematic reviews on hypertension, diabetes, and chronic care. Search terms included variations of the following: self-care, self-management, self-monitoring, (shared) decision-making, patient education, patient motivation, patient engagement, chronic disease, chronically ill, and randomized controlled trial (RCT). Studies were included only if they: (1) compared patient engagement interventions to an appropriate control among adults with chronic disease aged 18 years and older; (2) had minimum 3 months between pre- and post-intervention measurements; and (3) defined patient engagement as: (a) understanding the importance of taking an active role in one's health and health care; (b) having the knowledge, skills, and confidence to manage health; and (c) using knowledge, skills and confidence to perform health-promoting behaviors. Three authors and two research assistants independently extracted data using predefined fields including quality metrics. We reviewed 543 abstracts to identify 10 trials that met full inclusion criteria, four of which had "high" methodological quality (Jadad score >= 3). Diverse measurement of patient engagement prevented robust statistical analyses, so data were qualitatively described. Nine studies documented improvements in patient engagement. Five studies reported reduction in clinical markers of disease (e.g., HbA1C). All studies reported improvements in self-reported health status. This review suggests patient engagement should be quantified as part of a comprehensive health risk appraisal given its apparent value in helping individuals to effectively self-manage chronic disease. Patient engagement measures should include assessment of the knowledge, confidence and skills to prevent and manage chronic disease, plus the behaviors to do so.
    Genome Medicine 02/2014; 6(2):16.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Michael Snyder shares his thoughts on participatory medicine and how omics profiling could fit into this new model of healthcare where patients are at the center of medicine.
    Genome Medicine 01/2014; 6(1):6.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Kim Norris answers questions on the role of the patient advocate within a participatory medicine system.
    Genome Medicine 01/2014; 6(1):7.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The field of human genomics has led advances in the sharing of data with a view to facilitating translation of research into innovations for human health. This change in scientific practice has been implemented through new policy developed by many principal investigators, project managers and funders, which has ultimately led to new forms of practice and innovative governance models for data sharing. Here, we examine the development of the governance of data sharing in genomics, and explore some of the key challenges associated with the design and implementation of these policies. We examine how the incremental nature of policy design, the perennial problem of consent, the gridlock caused by multiple and overlapping access systems, the administrative burden and the problems with incentives and acknowledgment all have an impact on the potential for data sharing to be maximized. We conclude by proposing ways in which the scientific community can address these problems, to improve the sustainability of data sharing into the future.
    Genome Medicine 01/2014; 6(1):4.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A report on the Precision Medicine: Personal Genomes and Pharmacogenomics meeting, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, USA, November 13-16, 2013.
    Genome Medicine 01/2014; 6(1):3.

Related Journals