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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Strategy for communicating benefit-risk decisions: a comparison of regulatory agencies' publicly available documents
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Pharmacology, December 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fphar.2014.00269 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Leong Wai Yeen, James, Salek, Sam, Walker, Stuart |
| Abstract |
The assessment report formats of four major regulatory reference agencies, US Food and Drug Administration, European Medicines Agency, Health Canada, and Australia's Therapeutic Goods Administration were compared to a benefit-risk (BR) documentation template developed by the Centre for Innovation in Regulatory Science and a four-member Consortium on Benefit-Risk Assessment. A case study was also conducted using a US FDA Medical Review, the European Public Assessment Report and Australia's Public Assessment Report for the same product. Compared with the BR Template, existing regulatory report formats are inadequate regarding the listing of benefits and risks, the assigning of relative importance and values, visualization and the utilization of a detailed, systematic, standardized structure. The BR Template is based on the principles of BR assessment common to major regulatory agencies. Given that there are minimal differences among the existing regulatory report formats, it is timely to consider the feasibility of a universal template. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 11 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 4 | 36% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 4 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 2 | 18% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 9% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 9% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 9% |
| Other | 2 | 18% |
| Unknown | 3 | 27% |
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 04 December 2014.
All research outputs
#20,245,139
of 22,772,779 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#9,999
of 16,011 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#302,151
of 360,768 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#42
of 63 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,772,779 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,011 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 360,768 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 63 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.