↓ Skip to main content

Clinical evidence for orphan medicinal products--a cause for concern?

Overview of attention for article published in Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, October 2013
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 (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
5 tweeters
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
35 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.
Title
Clinical evidence for orphan medicinal products--a cause for concern?
Published in
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, October 2013
DOI 10.1186/1750-1172-8-164
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eline Picavet, David Cassiman, Carla E Hollak, Johan A Maertens, Steven Simoens

Abstract

The difficulties associated with organising clinical studies for orphan medicinal products (OMPs) are plentiful. Recent debate on the long-term effectiveness of some OMPs, led us to question whether the initial standards for clinical evidence for OMPs, set by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) at the time of marketing authorization, are too low. Therefore, the aim of this study was to quantitatively evaluate the characteristics and quality of clinical evidence that is presented for OMPs to obtain marketing authorization in Europe, using the new and validated COMPASS tool.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Unknown 34 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 29%
Researcher 7 20%
Student > Master 7 20%
Other 2 6%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 4 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 34%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 9%
Mathematics 3 9%
Social Sciences 3 9%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 6 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 29 October 2017.
All research outputs
#890,328
of 13,126,307 outputs
Outputs from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#80
of 1,446 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,440
of 179,512 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#2
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,126,307 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,446 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 179,512 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.