↓ Skip to main content

Amiodarone-induced thyroid dysfunction: brand-name versus generic formulations

Overview of attention for article published in Canadian Medical Association Journal, July 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
4 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 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
Amiodarone-induced thyroid dysfunction: brand-name versus generic formulations
Published in
Canadian Medical Association Journal, July 2011
DOI 10.1503/cmaj.101800
Pubmed ID
Authors

Meytal A Tsadok, Cynthia A Jackevicius, Elham Rahme, Vidal Essebag, Mark J Eisenberg, Karin H Humphries, Jack V Tu, Hassan Behlouli, Jennifer Joo, Louise Pilote

Abstract

Amiodarone is associated with dysfunction of the thyroid. Concerns have arisen regarding the potential for adverse effects with generic formulations of amiodarone. We evaluated and compared the risk of thyroid dysfunction between patients using brand-name versus generic formulations of amiodarone and identified risk factors for thyroid dysfunction.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 2 4%
Netherlands 1 2%
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 42 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 26%
Other 6 13%
Researcher 6 13%
Student > Master 4 9%
Student > Bachelor 2 4%
Other 7 15%
Unknown 9 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 37%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 11%
Social Sciences 4 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 10 22%
Attention Score in Context

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 27 April 2017.
All research outputs
#14,134,869
of 22,649,029 outputs
Outputs from Canadian Medical Association Journal
#6,191
of 8,659 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#79,762
of 116,492 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Canadian Medical Association Journal
#60
of 88 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,649,029 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,659 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 32.7. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 116,492 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 88 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.