↓ Skip to main content

Comparative Evaluation of the Predictive Performances of Three Different Structural Population Pharmacokinetic Models To Predict Future Voriconazole Concentrations

Overview of attention for article published in Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
15 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
Comparative Evaluation of the Predictive Performances of Three Different Structural Population Pharmacokinetic Models To Predict Future Voriconazole Concentrations
Published in
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, October 2016
DOI 10.1128/aac.00970-16
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andras Farkas, Gergely Daroczi, Phillip Villasurda, Michael Dolton, Midori Nakagaki, Jason A. Roberts

Abstract

Bayesian methods for voriconazole therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) have been reported previously but there are only sparse reports comparing the accuracy and precision of predictions of published models. Furthermore, the comparative accuracy of linear, mixed linear and non-linear, or entirely nonlinear models may be of high clinical relevance. In this study, models were coded into Individually Designed Optimum Dosing Strategies (ID-ODS™) with voriconazole concentration data analyzed using inverse Bayesian modeling. The data used was from two independent datasets, patients with proven or suspected invasive fungal infections (n=57) and hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients (n=10). Observed voriconazole concentrations were predicted, where for each concentration value, the data available to that point were used to predict that value. The mean prediction error (ME) and mean squared prediction error (MSE) and their 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) were calculated to measure absolute bias and precision, while delta ME (Δ ME) and delta MSE (Δ MSE) and their 95% CI to measure relative bias and precision, respectively. 519 voriconazole concentrations were analyzed using three models. MEs (95%CI) ranged from 0.09 (-0.02, 0.22), 0.23 (0.04, 0.42) to 0.35 (0.16 to 0.54) while the MSEs (95%CI) from 2.1 (1.03, 3.17), 4.98 (0.90, 9.06), to 4.97 (-0.54 to 10.48) for the linear, mixed, and non-linear models, respectively. In conclusion, while simulations with the linear model were found to be slightly more accurate and similarly precise, the small difference in accuracy is likely negligible from the clinical point of view making all three approaches appropriate for use in a voriconazole TDM program.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 3 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 20%
Student > Master 2 13%
Professor 1 7%
Unspecified 1 7%
Other 2 13%
Unknown 3 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 33%
Computer Science 2 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 13%
Chemistry 1 7%
Unspecified 1 7%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 21 October 2016.
All research outputs
#3,623,019
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
#2,795
of 15,580 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,934
of 323,814 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
#150
of 262 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,580 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 323,814 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 262 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.