↓ Skip to main content

Clinical pharmacogenetics implementation consortium guideline (CPIC) for CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 genotypes and dosing of tricyclic antidepressants: 2016 update

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics, February 2017
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 (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
6 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
255 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
224 Mendeley
Title
Clinical pharmacogenetics implementation consortium guideline (CPIC) for CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 genotypes and dosing of tricyclic antidepressants: 2016 update
Published in
Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics, February 2017
DOI 10.1002/cpt.597
Pubmed ID
Authors

JK Hicks, K Sangkuhl, JJ Swen, VL Ellingrod, DJ Müller, K Shimoda, JR Bishop, ED Kharasch, TC Skaar, A Gaedigk, HM Dunnenberger, TE Klein, KE Caudle, JC Stingl

Abstract

CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 polymorphisms affect the exposure, efficacy and safety of tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), with some drugs being affected by CYP2D6 only (e.g., nortriptyline and desipramine) and others by both polymorphic enzymes (e.g., amitriptyline, clomipramine, doxepin, imipramine, and trimipramine). Evidence is presented for CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 genotype-directed dosing of TCAs. This document is an update to the 2012 Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) guideline for CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 Genotypes and Dosing of Tricyclic Antidepressants. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 224 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 <1%
Unknown 223 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 31 14%
Student > Bachelor 30 13%
Student > Master 29 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 12%
Other 19 8%
Other 40 18%
Unknown 48 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 50 22%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 49 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 40 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 4%
Neuroscience 6 3%
Other 17 8%
Unknown 52 23%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 03 November 2019.
All research outputs
#1,613,297
of 16,133,257 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics
#276
of 3,420 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#51,066
of 388,956 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics
#6
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,133,257 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,420 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 388,956 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.