↓ Skip to main content

RUCAM in Drug and Herb Induced Liver Injury: The Update

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Molecular Sciences, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
542 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
272 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
RUCAM in Drug and Herb Induced Liver Injury: The Update
Published in
International Journal of Molecular Sciences, December 2015
DOI 10.3390/ijms17010014
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gaby Danan, Rolf Teschke

Abstract

RUCAM (Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method) or its previous synonym CIOMS (Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences) is a well established tool in common use to quantitatively assess causality in cases of suspected drug induced liver injury (DILI) and herb induced liver injury (HILI). Historical background and the original work confirm the use of RUCAM as single term for future cases, dismissing now the term CIOMS for reasons of simplicity and clarity. RUCAM represents a structured, standardized, validated, and hepatotoxicity specific diagnostic approach that attributes scores to individual key items, providing final quantitative gradings of causality for each suspect drug/herb in a case report. Experts from Europe and the United States had previously established in consensus meetings the first criteria of RUCAM to meet the requirements of clinicians and practitioners in care for their patients with suspected DILI and HILI. RUCAM was completed by additional criteria and validated, assisting to establish the timely diagnosis with a high degree of certainty. In many countries and for more than two decades, physicians, regulatory agencies, case report authors, and pharmaceutical companies successfully applied RUCAM for suspected DILI and HILI. Their practical experience, emerging new data on DILI and HILI characteristics, and few ambiguous questions in domains such alcohol use and exclusions of non-drug causes led to the present update of RUCAM. The aim was to reduce interobserver and intraobserver variability, to provide accurately defined, objective core elements, and to simplify the handling of the items. We now present the update of the well accepted original RUCAM scale and recommend its use for clinical, regulatory, publication, and expert purposes to validly establish causality in cases of suspected DILI and HILI, facilitating a straightforward application and an internationally harmonized approach of causality assessment as a common basic tool.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 272 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
India 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Unknown 269 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 11%
Student > Bachelor 28 10%
Student > Postgraduate 25 9%
Student > Master 25 9%
Researcher 21 8%
Other 58 21%
Unknown 86 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 97 36%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 34 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 3%
Chemistry 4 1%
Other 20 7%
Unknown 98 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 28 December 2023.
All research outputs
#8,343,963
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Molecular Sciences
#11,628
of 44,771 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#121,260
of 397,659 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Molecular Sciences
#100
of 356 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 44,771 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 397,659 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 356 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.