↓ Skip to main content

Pediatric Clinical Pharmacology

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 10: Sample Collection, Biobanking, and Analysis
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 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.
Chapter title
Sample Collection, Biobanking, and Analysis
Chapter number 10
Book title
Pediatric Clinical Pharmacology
Published in
Handbook of experimental pharmacology, January 2011
DOI 10.1007/978-3-642-20195-0_10
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-3-64-220194-3, 978-3-64-220195-0
Authors

Maurice J. Ahsman, Dick Tibboel, Ron A. A. Mathot, Saskia N. de Wildt

Abstract

Pediatric pharmacokinetic studies require sampling of biofluids from neonates and children. Limitations on sampling frequency and sample volume complicate the design of these studies. In addition, strict guidelines, designed to guarantee patient safety, are in place. This chapter describes the practical implications of sample collection and their storage, with special focus on the selection of the appropriate type of biofluid and withdrawal technique. In addition, we describe appropriate measures for storage of these specimens, for example, in the context of biobanking, and the requirements on drug assay methods that they pose. Pharmacokinetic studies in children are possible, but they require careful selection of an appropriate sampling method, specimen volume, and assay method. The checklist provided could help prospective researchers with the design of an appropriate study protocol and infrastructure.

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 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 33%
Researcher 5 28%
Other 3 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 6%
Student > Master 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 1 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 67%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 6%
Social Sciences 1 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 1 6%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 05 September 2011.
All research outputs
#15,234,609
of 22,651,245 outputs
Outputs from Handbook of experimental pharmacology
#392
of 643 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#140,016
of 180,239 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Handbook of experimental pharmacology
#15
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,651,245 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 643 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.3. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 180,239 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% 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 is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.