↓ Skip to main content

Clinical Implications of Emerging Data on the Safety of Proton Pump Inhibitors

Overview of attention for article published in Current Treatment Options in Gastroenterology, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 Mendeley
Title
Clinical Implications of Emerging Data on the Safety of Proton Pump Inhibitors
Published in
Current Treatment Options in Gastroenterology, January 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11938-017-0115-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Felice Schnoll-Sussman, Philip O. Katz

Abstract

Proton pump inhibitors (PPI) are among the safest class of drugs used by all care providers, including gastroenterologists. They are the mainstay in treatment of acid-related disease, in particular, gastroesophageal reflux disease. Without them, many patients would experience a major decrement in their quality of life. However, no drug is without side effects or adverse events. In the past decade, numerous reports, principally case control studies and meta-analyses, have raised questions about important adverse events related to the use of PPIs. This has affected not only physicians' prescribing habits but patients' concerns about using these medications, particularly long term. Several FDA warnings are listed including those related to long bone fractures, interaction with clopidogrel, enteric infections, and hypomagnesaemia. More recently, concerns regarding PPIs and cardiovascular events have resurfaced as have issues related to kidney disease and dementia. The methodology of these studies allows us to find an association with these events but does not provide us with sufficient evidence to determine causality. In general, the findings of the available studies do not fit with our clinical experience nor is the magnitude of the association sufficient to result in a major change in our practice. Nevertheless, the recent literature has resulted in our careful reevaluation of PPI use across both FDA indications and in general. This article will critically review the literature regarding potential PPI adverse events and attempt to place them in perspective for the practicing physician.

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 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Austria 1 2%
Unknown 56 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 12%
Student > Master 7 12%
Student > Bachelor 7 12%
Researcher 6 11%
Other 5 9%
Other 12 21%
Unknown 13 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 46%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Neuroscience 2 4%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 15 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 16 June 2019.
All research outputs
#6,482,925
of 23,406,603 outputs
Outputs from Current Treatment Options in Gastroenterology
#76
of 277 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#121,306
of 421,251 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Treatment Options in Gastroenterology
#4
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,406,603 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 277 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 421,251 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.