↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet

Readers on

mendeley
7 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
On the Combination of c- and D-Optimal Designs: General Approaches and Applications in Dose–Response Studies
Published in
Biometrics, May 2016
DOI 10.1111/biom.12545
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Dose-response modeling in areas such as toxicology is often conducted using a parametric approach. While estimation of parameters is usually one of the goals, often the main aim of the study is the estimation of quantities derived from the parameters, such as the ED50 dose. From the view of statistical optimal design theory such an objective corresponds to a c-optimal design criterion. Unfortunately, c-optimal designs often create practical problems, and furthermore commonly do not allow actual estimation of the parameters. It is therefore useful to consider alternative designs which show good c-performance, while still being applicable in practice and allowing reasonably good general parameter estimation. In effect, using optimal design terminology this means that a reasonable performance regarding the D-criterion is expected as well. In this article, we propose several approaches to the task of combining c- and D-efficient designs, such as using mixed information functions or setting minimum requirements regarding either c- or D-efficiency, and show how to algorithmically determine optimal designs in each case. We apply all approaches to a standard situation from toxicology, and obtain a much better balance between c- and D-performance. Next, we investigate how to adapt the designs to different parameter values. Finally, we show that the methodology used here is not just limited to the combination of c- and D-designs, but can also be used to handle more general constraint situations such as limits on the cost of an experiment.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 7 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 7 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Lecturer 1 14%
Student > Bachelor 1 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 14%
Student > Master 1 14%
Researcher 1 14%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 2 29%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Mathematics 1 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 14%
Chemistry 1 14%
Engineering 1 14%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 2 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 24 May 2016.
All research outputs
#4,614,470
of 24,508,104 outputs
Outputs from Biometrics
#221
of 1,929 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,373
of 340,645 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biometrics
#7
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,508,104 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,929 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its peers.
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 340,645 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.