↓ Skip to main content

Incorporation of Pharmacogenomics into Routine Clinical Practice: the Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) Guideline Development Process

Overview of attention for article published in Current Drug Metabolism, March 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#5 of 512)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
17 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
246 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
245 Mendeley
Title
Incorporation of Pharmacogenomics into Routine Clinical Practice: the Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) Guideline Development Process
Published in
Current Drug Metabolism, March 2014
DOI 10.2174/1389200215666140130124910
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kelly Caudle, Teri Klein, James Hoffman, Daniel Muller, Michelle Whirl-Carrillo, Li Gong, Ellen McDonagh, Katrin Sangkuhl, Caroline Thorn, Matthias Schwab, Jose Agundez, Robert Freimuth, Vojtech Huser, Ming Michael Lee, Otito Iwuchukwu, Kristine Crews, Stuart Scott, Mia Wadelius, Jesse Swen, Rachel Tyndale, C. Stein, Dan Roden, Mary Relling, Marc Williams, Samuel Johnson

Abstract

The Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) publishes genotype-based drug guidelines to help clinicians understand how available genetic test results could be used to optimize drug therapy. CPIC has focused initially on well-known examples of pharmacogenomic associations that have been implemented in selected clinical settings, publishing nine to date. Each CPIC guideline adheres to a standardized format and includes a standard system for grading levels of evidence linking genotypes to phenotypes and assigning a level of strength to each prescribing recommendation. CPIC guidelines contain the necessary information to help clinicians translate patient-specific diplotypes for each gene into clinical phenotypes or drug dosing groups. This paper reviews the development process of the CPIC guidelines and compares this process to the Institute of Medicine's Standards for Developing Trustworthy Clinical Practice Guidelines.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 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 245 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 1%
Japan 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Unknown 240 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 50 20%
Student > Master 36 15%
Other 26 11%
Student > Bachelor 25 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 9%
Other 58 24%
Unknown 29 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 46 19%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 46 19%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 43 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 36 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 2%
Other 26 11%
Unknown 42 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 35. 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 18 May 2020.
All research outputs
#728,563
of 17,749,513 outputs
Outputs from Current Drug Metabolism
#5
of 512 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,085
of 199,260 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Drug Metabolism
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,749,513 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 512 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 199,260 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them