↓ Skip to main content

Uso de medicamentos fuera de ficha la técnica en oncohematología: resultado de una encuesta nacional

Overview of attention for article published in Farmacia Hospitalaria, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 Mendeley
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.
Title
Uso de medicamentos fuera de ficha la técnica en oncohematología: resultado de una encuesta nacional
Published in
Farmacia Hospitalaria, September 2015
DOI 10.7399/fh.2015.39.5.8979
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eva González-Haba Peña, María José Agustín Ferrández, Irene Mangues Bafalluy, Nicolás Alfredo López, María Dolores Fraga Fuentes, Roberto Marín Gil, María José Martínez Bautista, Ana Clopés Estela

Abstract

identify by means of a survey the off-label treatments more often used in the oncohaematology area, as well as to know the established procedures and criteria used to authorise those treatments. a four-section survey was designed: 1) demographic data and hospital activity, 2) Off-label treatments protocol, 3) Approval criteria and 4) Off-label oncology treatments conducted during the last year. in 42.1% of the hospitals it's needed an authorisation before dispensing in more tan 80% of the treatments. The most influential factor in the approval-dispensation system is the available evidence. The consent of the hospital management with previous Pharmacy department's report was the most common authorisation procedure. 55.3% of the hospitals settled specific patient criteria to help the decision-making altogether with the available safety and efficacy data of the drug for the requested indication. In most centers a lower level of evidence is accepted if there are no therapeutic alternatives as well as in tumors of low prevalence. Most of the centers have not clearly established a criterion of effectiveness to consider a benefit as clinically relevant, nor the cost-effectiveness threshold for approving a FFT. there is a great variability in the off-label treatments use and also in the criteria used for its approval.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 2 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 6%
Student > Bachelor 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Other 3 18%
Unknown 7 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 18%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 12%
Philosophy 1 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 6%
Chemistry 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 9 53%
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 09 November 2015.
All research outputs
#15,173,117
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Farmacia Hospitalaria
#134
of 368 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#135,210
of 276,816 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Farmacia Hospitalaria
#1
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 368 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 276,816 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them