↓ Skip to main content

Blinded Prospective Evaluation of Computer-Based Mechanistic Schizophrenia Disease Model for Predicting Drug Response

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, December 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
62 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
Blinded Prospective Evaluation of Computer-Based Mechanistic Schizophrenia Disease Model for Predicting Drug Response
Published in
PLOS ONE, December 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0049732
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hugo Geerts, Athan Spiros, Patrick Roberts, Roy Twyman, Larry Alphs, Anthony A. Grace

Abstract

The tremendous advances in understanding the neurobiological circuits involved in schizophrenia have not translated into more effective treatments. An alternative strategy is to use a recently published 'Quantitative Systems Pharmacology' computer-based mechanistic disease model of cortical/subcortical and striatal circuits based upon preclinical physiology, human pathology and pharmacology. The physiology of 27 relevant dopamine, serotonin, acetylcholine, norepinephrine, gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) and glutamate-mediated targets is calibrated using retrospective clinical data on 24 different antipsychotics. The model was challenged to predict quantitatively the clinical outcome in a blinded fashion of two experimental antipsychotic drugs; JNJ37822681, a highly selective low-affinity dopamine D(2) antagonist and ocaperidone, a very high affinity dopamine D(2) antagonist, using only pharmacology and human positron emission tomography (PET) imaging data. The model correctly predicted the lower performance of JNJ37822681 on the positive and negative syndrome scale (PANSS) total score and the higher extra-pyramidal symptom (EPS) liability compared to olanzapine and the relative performance of ocaperidone against olanzapine, but did not predict the absolute PANSS total score outcome and EPS liability for ocaperidone, possibly due to placebo responses and EPS assessment methods. Because of its virtual nature, this modeling approach can support central nervous system research and development by accounting for unique human drug properties, such as human metabolites, exposure, genotypes and off-target effects and can be a helpful tool for drug discovery and development.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 59 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 21%
Other 7 11%
Student > Bachelor 7 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Other 11 18%
Unknown 17 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 19%
Psychology 11 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 10%
Neuroscience 6 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 20 32%
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 June 2019.
All research outputs
#4,490,142
of 22,689,790 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#61,466
of 193,655 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#47,306
of 278,890 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#1,089
of 4,825 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,689,790 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 193,655 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 278,890 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,825 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.