↓ Skip to main content

Of Mice and Men

Overview of attention for article published in CNS Drugs, August 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

facebook
4 Facebook pages
googleplus
3 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
120 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
116 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Of Mice and Men
Published in
CNS Drugs, August 2012
DOI 10.2165/11310890-000000000-00000
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hugo Geerts

Abstract

The tremendous advances in transgene animal technology, especially in the area of Alzheimer's disease, have not resulted in a significantly better success rate for drugs entering clinical development. Despite substantial increases in research and development budgets, the number of approved drugs in general has not increased, leading to the so-called innovation gap. While animal models have been very useful in documenting the possible pathological mechanisms in many CNS diseases, they are not very predictive in the area of drug development. This paper reports on a number of under-appreciated fundamental differences between animal models and human patients in the context of drug discovery with special emphasis on Alzheimer's disease and schizophrenia, such as different affinities of the same drug for human versus rodent target subtypes and the absence of many functional genotypes in animal models. I also offer a number of possible solutions to bridge the translational disconnect and improve the predictability of preclinical models, such as more emphasis on good-quality translational studies, more pre-competitive information sharing and the embracing of multi-target pharmacology strategies. Re-engineering the process for drug discovery and development, in a similar way to other more successful industries, is another possible but disrupting solution to the growing innovation gap. This includes the development of hybrid computational models, based upon documented preclinical physiology and pharmacology, but populated and validated with clinical data from actual patients.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 116 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 3%
Unknown 113 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 21 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 16%
Student > Bachelor 14 12%
Student > Master 11 9%
Other 10 9%
Other 21 18%
Unknown 20 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 35 30%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 12%
Neuroscience 9 8%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 4%
Other 21 18%
Unknown 27 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 25 September 2016.
All research outputs
#7,538,708
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from CNS Drugs
#688
of 1,403 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#55,401
of 191,537 outputs
Outputs of similar age from CNS Drugs
#251
of 547 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,403 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.8. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 191,537 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 547 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.