| Title |
Existing data sources for clinical epidemiology: Danish registries for studies of medical genetic diseases
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Epidemiology, August 2013
|
| DOI | 10.2147/clep.s45228 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mary Nguyen-Nielsen, Elisabeth Svensson, Ida Vogel, Vera Ehrenstein, Lone Sunde |
| Abstract |
Denmark has an extensive collection of national and regional medical registries. There are many advantages to registry-based research when investigating genetic diseases which, due to their rarity, can be difficult to identify. In this study, we aimed to provide an updated overview of Danish registries for medical genetic conditions and describe how data linkage across registries can be used to collect data on genetic diseases at the individual level and at the family level. We present a list of medical genetic registries in Denmark at the national level, data sources from the departments of clinical genetics and other specialized centers, and project-specific data sources. We also summarize key general registries, such as the Danish National Registry of Patients, the Danish Medical Birth Registry, and the Civil Registration System, which are renowned for their comprehensive and high quality data, and are useful supplemental data sources for genetic epidemiology research. We describe the potential for data linkage across multiple registries, which allows for access to medical histories with follow-up time spanning birth to death. Finally, we provide a brief introduction to the Danish epidemiological research setting and legalities related to data access. The Danish collection of medical registries is a valuable resource for genetic epidemiology research. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 33% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Denmark | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 36 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 9 | 24% |
| Researcher | 7 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 8% |
| Professor | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 8 | 22% |
| Unknown | 2 | 5% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 57% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 2 | 5% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 28 March 2015.
All research outputs
#13,691,082
of 22,715,151 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Epidemiology
#390
of 712 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#107,202
of 198,394 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Epidemiology
#9
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,715,151 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 712 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.8. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 198,394 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 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.