↓ Skip to main content

Near-infrared monitoring of roller compacted ribbon density: Investigating sources of variation contributing to noisy spectral data

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 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
Near-infrared monitoring of roller compacted ribbon density: Investigating sources of variation contributing to noisy spectral data
Published in
European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences, February 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.ejps.2017.02.024
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mary Ellen Crowley, Avril Hegarty, Michael A.P. McAuliffe, Graham E. O'Mahony, Luke Kiernan, Kevin Hayes, Abina M. Crean

Abstract

The aim of this study was to highlight how variability in roller compacted ribbon quality can impact on NIR spectral measurement and to propose a simple method of data selection to remove erroneous spectra. The use of NIR spectroscopy for monitoring ribbon envelope density has been previously demonstrated, however to date there has been limited discussion as to how spectral data sets can contain erroneous outliers due to poor sample presentation to the NIR probes. In this study compacted ribbon of variable quality was produced from three separate blends of microcrystalline cellulose (MCC)/lactose/magnesium stearate at 8 Roll Force settings (2-16kN/cm). The three blends differed only in the storage conditions of MCC prior to blending and compaction. MCC sublots were stored at ambient (41% RH/20°C), low humidity (11% RH/20°C) and high humidity (75% RH/40°C) conditions prior to blending. Ribbon envelope density was measured and ribbon NIR spectral data was acquired at line using a multi-probe spectrometer (MultiEye™ NIR). Initial inspection of the at-line NIR spectral data set showed a large degree of variability which indicated that some form of data cleaning was required. The source of variability in spectral measurements was investigated by subjective visual examination and by statistical analysis. Spectral variability was noted due to the storage conditions of MCC prior to compaction, Roll Force settings and between individual ribbon samples sampled at a set Roll Force/Blend combination. Variability was also caused by ribbon presentation to probes, such as differences in the presentation of broken, curved and flat intact ribbons. Based on the subjective visual examination of data, a Visual Discard method was applied and was found to be particularly successful for blends containing MCC stored at ambient and low humidity. However the Visual Discard method of spectra cleaning is subjective and therefore a non-subjective method capable of screening for erroneous probe readings was developed. For this data set a Trimmed Mean method was applied to set a limit on how data is cleaned from the data set allowing for the removal of a faulty probe reading (25% of data) or a poor sample (33% of data). The 33% Trimmed Mean reduced the impact of spectral variation or misreads between samples or probes and was found to be as successful as the Visual Discard method at cleaning the data set prior to development of the calibration equation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 34 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Other 2 6%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 10 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 18%
Chemistry 4 12%
Engineering 2 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 6%
Other 6 18%
Unknown 12 35%
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 16 April 2018.
All research outputs
#15,989,045
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences
#1,897
of 2,950 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#185,215
of 319,461 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences
#44
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,950 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 319,461 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 62 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.