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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Pharmacokinetic Variability of Amikacin After Once-Daily and Twice-Daily Dosing Regimen in Full-Term Neonates
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Pharmacological Sciences, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1254/jphs.13126fp |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Katarina Vučićević, Zorica Rakonjac, Branislava Miljković, Borisav Janković, Milica Prostran |
| Abstract |
The purpose of the study was to compare peak (Cpeak) and trough (Ctrough) amikacin levels after twice-daily (TD) or once-daily dosing (OD) in full-term neonates. Additionally, the study aimed to address amikacin pharmacokinetics and its variability. Data included 31 patients born on term. Amikacin daily dose was 15 or 20 mg/kg depending on the neonate's age. Patients randomly received amikacin every 12 or 24 h. In all patients corresponding Cpeak and Ctrough were taken. Volume of distribution (Vd), clearance (CL) and half-life (t1/2) were calculated. Mean Cpeak of 21.79 μg/ml in the TD group was statistically different from Cpeak of 36.39 μg/ml in the OD group. Average Ctrough in TD (5.67 μg/ml) was statistically different from the corresponding 3.99 μg/ml in the OD group. Mean amikacin Vd, CL, and t1/2 were 0.78 ± 0.38 l/kg, 86.99 ± 48.22 ml/h∙kg, and 6.81 ± 2.51 h, respectively. High interindividual pharmacokinetic variability was observed. Further analysis showed that neonatal age contributed to the pharmacokinetic parameters' values. Statistically significant difference in CL and t1/2 was observed between patients age ≤ 2 and > 2 days on therapy initiation. As expected, amikacin given OD achieved higher Cpeak and lower Ctrough than TD. Based on the results, observed variability in amikacin pharmacokinetics was possibly due to the renal maturation process. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 26 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 19% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 15% |
| Other | 3 | 12% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 7 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 46% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 12% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 6 | 23% |
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 13 April 2021.
All research outputs
#8,534,976
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pharmacological Sciences
#381
of 1,610 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#97,114
of 320,591 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pharmacological Sciences
#2
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 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 1,610 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 320,591 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 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 66% of its contemporaries.