| Title |
Hypnotics
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PharmacoEconomics, November 2012
|
| DOI | 10.2165/00019053-199610020-00007 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Robert Janknegt, Ary van der Kuy, Guus Declerck, Chris Idzikowski |
| Abstract |
Selection of hypnotics for drug formularies in The Netherlands, France and the UK is made by means of the System of Objectified Judgement Analysis (SOJA) method. The following criteria are included in the method: clinical efficacy (maximal 300 points), adverse effects (250 points), clinical documentation (150 points), cost (120 points), pharmacokinetic properties (80 points), toxicity (50 points), drug interactions (30 points) and the number of tablet strengths available (20 points). In all 3 countries, zolpidem, zopiclone and temazepam showed the highest score, followed by lormetazepam. High scores favour inclusion in formularies. Nitrazepam and loprazolam scored 75 to 130 points less than the top 3, and flunitrazepam shows the lowest score (119 to 183 points less than zolpidem, zopiclone and temazepam). Therefore, the first 3 (or 4) hypnotics are most suitable for formulary inclusion while the others are not. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 4 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 4 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Professor | 1 | 25% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 25% |
| Researcher | 1 | 25% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 50% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 25% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 25% |
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 26 September 2021.
All research outputs
#8,534,528
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from PharmacoEconomics
#996
of 1,991 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#86,227
of 285,558 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PharmacoEconomics
#130
of 367 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,991 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 285,558 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 367 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.