↓ Skip to main content

Effects of the Preparation Process on the Properties of Amorphous Solid Dispersions

Overview of attention for article published in AAPS PharmSciTech, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
57 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
123 Mendeley
Title
Effects of the Preparation Process on the Properties of Amorphous Solid Dispersions
Published in
AAPS PharmSciTech, September 2017
DOI 10.1208/s12249-017-0861-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Siyuan Huang, Robert O. Williams

Abstract

The use of amorphous solid dispersions to improve the bioavailability of active ingredients from the BCS II and IV classifications continues to gain interest in the pharmaceutical industry. Over the last decade, methods for generating amorphous solid dispersions have been well established in commercially available products and in the literature. However, the amorphous solid dispersions manufactured by different technologies differ in many aspects, primarily chemical stability, physical stability, and performance, both in vitro and in vivo. This review analyzes the impact of manufacturing methods on those properties of amorphous solid dispersions. For example, the chemical stability of drugs and polymers can be influenced by differences in the level of thermal exposure during fusion-based and solvent-based processes. The physical stability of amorphous content varies according to the thermal history, particle morphology, and nucleation process of amorphous solid dispersions produced by different methods. The in vitro and in vivo performance of amorphous formulations are also affected by differences in particle morphology and in the molecular interactions caused by the manufacturing method. Additionally, we describe the mechanism of manufacturing methods and the thermodynamic theories that relate to amorphous formulations.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 123 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 123 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 17%
Student > Bachelor 12 10%
Researcher 6 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 2%
Other 10 8%
Unknown 50 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 42 34%
Chemistry 9 7%
Chemical Engineering 8 7%
Engineering 3 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 7 6%
Unknown 52 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 03 August 2018.
All research outputs
#14,791,091
of 25,392,205 outputs
Outputs from AAPS PharmSciTech
#932
of 1,589 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#161,923
of 323,959 outputs
Outputs of similar age from AAPS PharmSciTech
#13
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,392,205 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,589 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 323,959 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 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 60% of its contemporaries.