↓ Skip to main content

Dosing recommendations for pharmacogenetic interactions related to drug metabolism

Overview of attention for article published in Pharmacogenetics and Genomics, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#44 of 1,280)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
21 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 Mendeley
Title
Dosing recommendations for pharmacogenetic interactions related to drug metabolism
Published in
Pharmacogenetics and Genomics, July 2016
DOI 10.1097/fpc.0000000000000220
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kelly K. Filipski, Michael A. Pacanowski, Anuradha Ramamoorthy, William Gregory Feero, Andrew N. Freedman

Abstract

Pharmacogenomic studies have established the important contribution of drug-metabolizing enzyme genotype toward drug toxicity and treatment failure; however, clinical implementation of pharmacogenomics has been slow. The aim of this study was to systematically review the information on drug-metabolizing enzyme pharmacogenomics available in the US drug labeling, practice guidelines, and recommendations. Drug-metabolizing enzyme genotype and phenotype information was assessed in US FDA drug labeling, clinical practice guidelines, and independent technology assessors to evaluate the consistency in information sources for healthcare providers. Eighty four gene-drug pairs were identified as having drug-metabolizing enzyme genotype or phenotype information within the label. The manner in which pharmacogenomic information was presented was heterogeneous both within the label and between clinical practice recommendations. For proper implementation of pharmacogenomics in clinical practice, information sources for healthcare providers should relay consistent and clear information for the appropriate use of biomarkers.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 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 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
France 1 3%
Unknown 32 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 7 21%
Researcher 7 21%
Student > Master 4 12%
Librarian 2 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 6%
Other 7 21%
Unknown 5 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 24%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 21%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 9 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 June 2023.
All research outputs
#2,457,182
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Pharmacogenetics and Genomics
#44
of 1,280 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,515
of 373,353 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pharmacogenetics and Genomics
#2
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,280 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 373,353 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.