↓ Skip to main content

Pattern Recognition in Pharmacokinetic Data Analysis

Overview of attention for article published in The AAPS Journal, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
99 Mendeley
Title
Pattern Recognition in Pharmacokinetic Data Analysis
Published in
The AAPS Journal, September 2015
DOI 10.1208/s12248-015-9817-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Johan Gabrielsson, Bernd Meibohm, Daniel Weiner

Abstract

Pattern recognition is a key element in pharmacokinetic data analyses when first selecting a model to be regressed to data. We call this process going from data to insight and it is an important aspect of exploratory data analysis (EDA). But there are very few formal ways or strategies that scientists typically use when the experiment has been done and data collected. This report deals with identifying the properties of a kinetic model by dissecting the pattern that concentration-time data reveal. Pattern recognition is a pivotal activity when modeling kinetic data, because a rigorous strategy is essential for dissecting the determinants behind concentration-time courses. First, we extend a commonly used relationship for calculation of the number of potential model parameters by simultaneously utilizing all concentration-time courses. Then, a set of points to consider are proposed that specifically addresses exploratory data analyses, number of phases in the concentration-time course, baseline behavior, time delays, peak shifts with increasing doses, flip-flop phenomena, saturation, and other potential nonlinearities that an experienced eye catches in the data. Finally, we set up a series of equations related to the patterns. In other words, we look at what causes the shapes that make up the concentration-time course and propose a strategy to construct a model. By practicing pattern recognition, one can significantly improve the quality and timeliness of data analysis and model building. A consequence of this is a better understanding of the complete concentration-time profile.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 98 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 23%
Researcher 16 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Student > Bachelor 6 6%
Student > Master 6 6%
Other 14 14%
Unknown 28 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 30 30%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 7%
Chemistry 5 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 4%
Other 11 11%
Unknown 28 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 01 February 2016.
All research outputs
#15,346,908
of 22,828,180 outputs
Outputs from The AAPS Journal
#917
of 1,287 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#156,610
of 266,943 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The AAPS Journal
#15
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,828,180 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,287 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 266,943 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.