↓ Skip to main content

Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium Guideline for HLA Genotype and Use of Carbamazepine and Oxcarbazepine: 2017 Update

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics, February 2018
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 (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
212 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
227 Mendeley
Title
Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium Guideline for HLA Genotype and Use of Carbamazepine and Oxcarbazepine: 2017 Update
Published in
Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics, February 2018
DOI 10.1002/cpt.1004
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elizabeth J. Phillips, Chonlaphat Sukasem, Michelle Whirl‐Carrillo, Daniel J. Müller, Henry M. Dunnenberger, Wasun Chantratita, Barry Goldspiel, Yuan‐Tsong Chen, Bruce C. Carleton, Alfred L. George, Taisei Mushiroda, Teri Klein, Roseann S. Gammal, Munir Pirmohamed

Abstract

The variant allele HLA-B*15:02 is strongly associated with greater risk of Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) in patients treated with carbamazepine or oxcarbazepine. The variant allele HLA-A*31:01 is associated with greater risk of maculopapular exanthema, drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms, and SJS/TEN in patients treated with carbamazepine. We summarize evidence from the published literature supporting these associations and provide recommendations for carbamazepine and oxcarbazepine use based on HLA genotypes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 227 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 227 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 30 13%
Researcher 29 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 10%
Student > Master 22 10%
Other 13 6%
Other 35 15%
Unknown 75 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 48 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 40 18%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 21 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 3%
Neuroscience 5 2%
Other 24 11%
Unknown 83 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 30. 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 14 June 2023.
All research outputs
#1,332,212
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics
#173
of 4,673 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,772
of 454,660 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics
#5
of 63 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 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 4,673 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 454,660 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 93% of its contemporaries.
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 has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.