↓ Skip to main content

Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium Guidelines for HLA-B Genotype and Abacavir Dosing: 2014 Update

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics, February 2014
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 (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
4 tweeters
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
95 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
192 Mendeley
Title
Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium Guidelines for HLA-B Genotype and Abacavir Dosing: 2014 Update
Published in
Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics, February 2014
DOI 10.1038/clpt.2014.38
Pubmed ID
Authors

M A Martin, J M Hoffman, R R Freimuth, T E Klein, B J Dong, M Pirmohamed, J K Hicks, M R Wilkinson, D W Haas, D L Kroetz

Abstract

The Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) Guidelines for HLA-B Genotype and Abacavir Dosing were originally published in April 2012. We reviewed recent literature and concluded that none of the evidence would change the therapeutic recommendations in the original guideline; therefore, the original publication remains clinically current. However, we have updated the Supplementary Material online and included additional resources for applying CPIC guidelines to the electronic health record. Up-to-date information can be found at PharmGKB (http://www.pharmgkb.org).

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 192 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Hungary 1 <1%
Malaysia 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Singapore 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 185 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 39 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 13%
Student > Master 23 12%
Other 20 10%
Student > Bachelor 16 8%
Other 47 24%
Unknown 23 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 56 29%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 35 18%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 28 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 23 12%
Engineering 3 2%
Other 23 12%
Unknown 24 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 26. 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 30 January 2020.
All research outputs
#931,692
of 17,359,532 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics
#120
of 3,620 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,899
of 198,510 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics
#5
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,359,532 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,620 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 96% 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 198,510 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 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.