↓ Skip to main content

Ontology-Based Vaccine and Drug Adverse Event Representation and Theory-Guided Systematic Causal Network Analysis Toward Integrative Pharmacovigilance Research

Overview of attention for article published in Current Pharmacology Reports, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
Title
Ontology-Based Vaccine and Drug Adverse Event Representation and Theory-Guided Systematic Causal Network Analysis Toward Integrative Pharmacovigilance Research
Published in
Current Pharmacology Reports, March 2016
DOI 10.1007/s40495-016-0055-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yongqun He

Abstract

Compared with controlled terminologies (e.g., MedDRA, CTCAE, and WHO-ART), the community-based Ontology of AEs (OAE) has many advantages in adverse event (AE) classifications. The OAE-derived Ontology of Vaccine AEs (OVAE) and Ontology of Drug Neuropathy AEs (ODNAE) serve as AE knowledge bases and support data integration and analysis. The Immune Response Gene Network Theory explains molecular mechanisms of vaccine-related AEs. The OneNet Theory of Life treats the whole process of a life of an organism as a single complex and dynamic network (i.e., OneNet). A new "OneNet effectiveness" tenet is proposed here to expand the OneNet theory. Derived from the OneNet theory, the author hypothesizes that one human uses one single genotype-rooted mechanism to respond to different vaccinations and drug treatments, and experimentally identified mechanisms are manifestations of the OneNet blueprint mechanism under specific conditions. The theories and ontologies interact together as semantic frameworks to support integrative pharmacovigilance research.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 4%
Unknown 27 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 29%
Researcher 5 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 11%
Student > Master 3 11%
Other 2 7%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 7 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 6 21%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 11%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 7%
Neuroscience 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 11 39%
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 28 July 2016.
All research outputs
#15,907,007
of 24,226,848 outputs
Outputs from Current Pharmacology Reports
#72
of 119 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#173,645
of 304,420 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Pharmacology Reports
#3
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,226,848 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 119 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.3. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 304,420 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.