A citation-based method for searching scientific literature

Daniel B Thiel, Jodyn Platt, Tevah Platt, Susan B King, Nicole Fisher, Robert Shelton, Sharon L R Kardia. Public Health Genomics 2015
Times Cited: 26







List of co-cited articles
110 articles co-cited >1



Times Cited
  Times     Co-cited
Similarity


Dynamic consent: a patient interface for twenty-first century research networks.
Jane Kaye, Edgar A Whitley, David Lund, Michael Morrison, Harriet Teare, Karen Melham. Eur J Hum Genet 2015
216
46

Towards 'Engagement 2.0': Insights from a study of dynamic consent with biobank participants.
Harriet Ja Teare, Michael Morrison, Edgar A Whitley, Jane Kaye. Digit Health 2015
23
39

Dynamic Consent: a potential solution to some of the challenges of modern biomedical research.
Isabelle Budin-Ljøsne, Harriet J A Teare, Jane Kaye, Stephan Beck, Heidi Beate Bentzen, Luciana Caenazzo, Clive Collett, Flavio D'Abramo, Heike Felzmann, Teresa Finlay,[...]. BMC Med Ethics 2017
82
30

From patients to partners: participant-centric initiatives in biomedical research.
Jane Kaye, Liam Curren, Nick Anderson, Kelly Edwards, Stephanie M Fullerton, Nadja Kanellopoulou, David Lund, Daniel G MacArthur, Deborah Mascalzoni, James Shepherd,[...]. Nat Rev Genet 2012
160
26

Broad consent versus dynamic consent in biobank research: is passive participation an ethical problem?
Kristin Solum Steinsbekk, Bjørn Kåre Myskja, Berge Solberg. Eur J Hum Genet 2013
120
26

Broad Consent for Research With Biological Samples: Workshop Conclusions.
Christine Grady, Lisa Eckstein, Ben Berkman, Dan Brock, Robert Cook-Deegan, Stephanie M Fullerton, Hank Greely, Mats G Hansson, Sara Hull, Scott Kim,[...]. Am J Bioeth 2015
138
26

Dynamic consent: a possible solution to improve patient confidence and trust in how electronic patient records are used in medical research.
Hawys Williams, Karen Spencer, Caroline Sanders, David Lund, Edgar A Whitley, Jane Kaye, William G Dixon. JMIR Med Inform 2015
55
23


The RUDY study: using digital technologies to enable a research partnership.
Harriet J A Teare, Joanna Hogg, Jane Kaye, Raashid Luqmani, Elaine Rush, Alison Turner, Laura Watts, Melanie Williams, M Kassim Javaid. Eur J Hum Genet 2017
18
27

Public opinion about the importance of privacy in biobank research.
David J Kaufman, Juli Murphy-Bollinger, Joan Scott, Kathy L Hudson. Am J Hum Genet 2009
171
15

Active choice but not too active: public perspectives on biobank consent models.
Christian M Simon, Jamie L'heureux, Jeffrey C Murray, Patricia Winokur, George Weiner, Elizabeth Newbury, Laura Shinkunas, Bridget Zimmerman. Genet Med 2011
105
15

A systematic literature review of individuals' perspectives on broad consent and data sharing in the United States.
Nanibaa' A Garrison, Nila A Sathe, Armand H Matheny Antommaria, Ingrid A Holm, Saskia C Sanderson, Maureen E Smith, Melissa L McPheeters, Ellen W Clayton. Genet Med 2016
83
15

Implementation of Electronic Consent at a Biobank: An Opportunity for Precision Medicine Research.
Natalie T Boutin, Kathleen Mathieu, Alison G Hoffnagle, Nicole L Allen, Victor M Castro, Megan Morash, P Pearl O'Rourke, Elizabeth L Hohmann, Neil Herring, Lynn Bry,[...]. J Pers Med 2016
27
15

Broadening consent--and diluting ethics?
B Hofmann. J Med Ethics 2009
95
15

Patient Perspectives on Sharing Anonymized Personal Health Data Using a Digital System for Dynamic Consent and Research Feedback: A Qualitative Study.
Karen Spencer, Caroline Sanders, Edgar A Whitley, David Lund, Jane Kaye, William Gregory Dixon. J Med Internet Res 2016
63
15

The Cooperative Health Research in South Tyrol (CHRIS) study: rationale, objectives, and preliminary results.
Cristian Pattaro, Martin Gögele, Deborah Mascalzoni, Roberto Melotti, Christine Schwienbacher, Alessandro De Grandi, Luisa Foco, Yuri D'Elia, Barbara Linder, Christian Fuchsberger,[...]. J Transl Med 2015
31
15

The RUDY study platform - a novel approach to patient driven research in rare musculoskeletal diseases.
M K Javaid, L Forestier-Zhang, L Watts, A Turner, C Ponte, H Teare, D Gray, N Gray, R Popert, J Hogg,[...]. Orphanet J Rare Dis 2016
23
17

A dynamic model of patient consent to sharing of medical record data.
William G Dixon, Karen Spencer, Hawys Williams, Caroline Sanders, David Lund, Edgar A Whitley, Jane Kaye. BMJ 2014
10
30


An investigation of the efficacy of electronic consenting interfaces of research permissions management system in a hospital setting.
Kapil Chalil Madathil, Reshmi Koikkara, Jihad Obeid, Joel S Greenstein, Iain C Sanderson, Katrina Fryar, Jay Moskowitz, Anand K Gramopadhye. Int J Med Inform 2013
41
11

Traditional and electronic informed consent for biobanking: a survey of U.S. biobanks.
Christian M Simon, David W Klein, Helen A Schartz. Biopreserv Biobank 2014
20
15

Interactive informed consent: randomized comparison with paper consents.
Michael C Rowbotham, John Astin, Kaitlin Greene, Steven R Cummings. PLoS One 2013
70
11

Improving understanding in the research informed consent process: a systematic review of 54 interventions tested in randomized control trials.
Adam Nishimura, Jantey Carey, Patricia J Erwin, Jon C Tilburt, M Hassan Murad, Jennifer B McCormick. BMC Med Ethics 2013
236
11

Public and biobank participant attitudes toward genetic research participation and data sharing.
A A Lemke, W A Wolf, J Hebert-Beirne, M E Smith. Public Health Genomics 2010
167
11

Why do participants enroll in population biobank studies? A systematic literature review.
Hélène Nobile, Eric Vermeulen, Kristof Thys, Manuela M Bergmann, Pascal Borry. Expert Rev Mol Diagn 2013
32
11


Consent and research governance in biobanks: evidence from focus groups with medical researchers.
E A Whitley, N Kanellopoulou, J Kaye. Public Health Genomics 2012
26
11

The evolution of withdrawal: negotiating research relationships in biobanking.
Karen Melham, Linda Briceno Moraia, Colin Mitchell, Michael Morrison, Harriet Teare, Jane Kaye. Life Sci Soc Policy 2014
9
33

Using digital technologies to engage with medical research: views of myotonic dystrophy patients in Japan.
Victoria Coathup, Harriet J A Teare, Jusaku Minari, Go Yoshizawa, Jane Kaye, Masanori P Takahashi, Kazuto Kato. BMC Med Ethics 2016
14
21

Hypothetical and factual willingness to participate in biobank research.
Linus Johnsson, Gert Helgesson, Thorunn Rafnar, Ingibjorg Halldorsdottir, Kee-Seng Chia, Stefan Eriksson, Mats G Hansson. Eur J Hum Genet 2010
59
11

Participants' recall and understanding of genomic research and large-scale data sharing.
Jill Oliver Robinson, Melody J Slashinski, Tao Wang, Susan G Hilsenbeck, Amy L McGuire. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics 2013
29
11

Improving informed consent: Stakeholder views.
Emily E Anderson, Susan B Newman, Alicia K Matthews. AJOB Empir Bioeth 2017
20
15

Biobanks and electronic medical records: enabling cost-effective research.
Erica Bowton, Julie R Field, Sunny Wang, Jonathan S Schildcrout, Sara L Van Driest, Jessica T Delaney, James Cowan, Peter Weeke, Jonathan D Mosley, Quinn S Wells,[...]. Sci Transl Med 2014
88
7

Development of a large-scale de-identified DNA biobank to enable personalized medicine.
D M Roden, J M Pulley, M A Basford, G R Bernard, E W Clayton, J R Balser, D R Masys. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2008
545
7

An ethics framework for a learning health care system: a departure from traditional research ethics and clinical ethics.
Ruth R Faden, Nancy E Kass, Steven N Goodman, Peter Pronovost, Sean Tunis, Tom L Beauchamp. Hastings Cent Rep 2013
280
7

The eMERGE Network: a consortium of biorepositories linked to electronic medical records data for conducting genomic studies.
Catherine A McCarty, Rex L Chisholm, Christopher G Chute, Iftikhar J Kullo, Gail P Jarvik, Eric B Larson, Rongling Li, Daniel R Masys, Marylyn D Ritchie, Dan M Roden,[...]. BMC Med Genomics 2011
447
7

Personal privacy, public benefits, and biobanks: a conjoint analysis of policy priorities and public perceptions.
Daryl Pullman, Holly Etchegary, Katherine Gallagher, Kathleen Hodgkinson, Montgomery Keough, David Morgan, Catherine Street. Genet Med 2012
35
7

Community perspectives on public health biobanking: an analysis of community meetings on the Michigan BioTrust for Health.
Daniel B Thiel, Tevah Platt, Jodyn Platt, Susan B King, Sharon L R Kardia. J Community Genet 2014
24
8


'Cool! and creepy': engaging with college student stakeholders in Michigan's biobank.
Tevah Platt, Jodyn Platt, Daniel B Thiel, Nicole Fisher, Sharon L R Kardia. J Community Genet 2014
12
16


Informed consent for biobanking: consensus-based guidelines for adequate comprehension.
Laura M Beskow, Carrie B Dombeck, Cole P Thompson, J Kemp Watson-Ormond, Kevin P Weinfurt. Genet Med 2015
38
7

Quality of informed consent: a new measure of understanding among research subjects.
S Joffe, E F Cook, P D Cleary, J W Clark, J C Weeks. J Natl Cancer Inst 2001
249
7

A rural community's involvement in the design and usability testing of a computer-based informed consent process for the Personalized Medicine Research Project.
Andrea N Mahnke, Joseph M Plasek, David G Hoffman, Nathan S Partridge, Wendy S Foth, Carol J Waudby, Luke V Rasmussen, Valerie D McManus, Catherine A McCarty. Am J Med Genet A 2014
12
16


Measuring trust in medical researchers.
Mark A Hall, Fabian Camacho, Janice S Lawlor, Venita Depuy, Jeremy Sugarman, Kevin Weinfurt. Med Care 2006
81
7

Characterizing biobank organizations in the U.S.: results from a national survey.
Gail E Henderson, R Jean Cadigan, Teresa P Edwards, Ian Conlon, Anders G Nelson, James P Evans, Arlene M Davis, Catherine Zimmer, Bryan J Weiner. Genome Med 2013
124
7

Public perspectives on returning genetics and genomics research results.
J O'Daniel, S B Haga. Public Health Genomics 2011
56
7


Public preferences regarding informed consent models for participation in population-based genomic research.
Jodyn Platt, Juli Bollinger, Rachel Dvoskin, Sharon L R Kardia, David Kaufman. Genet Med 2014
54
7


Co-cited is the co-citation frequency, indicating how many articles cite the article together with the query article. Similarity is the co-citation as percentage of the times cited of the query article or the article in the search results, whichever is the lowest. These numbers are calculated for the last 100 citations when articles are cited more than 100 times.