1,721,189 research outputs found
Comparison of EMA and FDA guidelines for drug interactions: An overview
No full text© 2014 Informa Healthcare USA, Inc. In 2013, the regulatory authorities of the European Union and the US issued, almost simultaneously, new editions of the industry guidelines for the requirements of drug testing during their development for drug-drug and drug-food interactions. That being said, there are significant differences in the requirements set by both guidelines, and the aim of this article is to point out those differences. In this review, the author carefully and comprehensively compared the publicly available guidelines via the official Food and Drug Administation's (FDA) and European Medicine Agency's (EMA) websites, highlighting the differences between the two sets. Unlike the guidelines provided by the FDA, the EMA guidelines lack set requirements for testing interactions with therapeutic proteins as well as with the usage of pharmacodynamics end-points. It also does not set standards for the use of the 'no interaction' declaration in the summary of product characteristics. On the other hand, the FDA currently lacks guidance for testing drug-food interactions, the use of the Relative Induction Score correlation method, and proving existence of reversible inhibition and mechanism-based inactivation. It is important to note that, while there are differences in the requirements for the FDA's and the EMA's drug interaction guidelines, they are not substantial and are mostly relating to the scope of requirements and precision of the standards set
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
Full text link“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Full text linkWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Full text linkWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
koamabayili/VECTRON-author-checklist: VECTRON author checklist
No full textWe have done our best to complete the author checklist relating to the use of animals in the hut study. Note that the objective for the hut study was to evaluate the IRS treatment applications for residual efficacy against Anopheles mosquitoes, including the local An. coluzzii mosquito population. Cows were only used to attract mosquitoes into the huts and no tests were carried out directly on the cows. The author checklist is intended for use with studies where experiments are carried out on animals, which is why we have had such difficulty in completing this for the hut study, as many of the questions do not relate to how the cows were used
Personalization of drug dose thematic issue: introduction article
No full textIntroduction: The need to individualize a drug dosage and adjust it to a patient’s physiological and/or pathophysiological status is rarely satisfied in routine clinical practice, primarily because of complexity of the adjustment task. Areas covered: The aim of this article is to shed light to basic principles of drug dosage individualization in the most frequent clinical states that affect pharmacokinetics of drugs. The principles are derived from published clinical studies conducted on diverse patient populations, using non-compartmental pharmacokinetic model. Expert opinion: Simple, but sufficiently exact, way to calculate appropriate drug dose for a patient is the one based on target average steady-state concentration and non-compartmental pharmacokinetic model. If target steady-state drug concentration and dosage interval are considered fixed, maintenance dose could be adjusted on the basis of expected changes of total drug clearance and bioavailability, while loading dose should be related to changes of volume of distribution and bioavailability. Relative increase or decrease of these pharmacokinetic parameters in regard to normal values in healthy persons is translated to relative (percentual) increase or decrease of maintenance and loading doses recommended in the drug monograph
Author-wise bibliometric analysis based on entropy.
No full textAuthor-wise bibliometric analysis based on entropy.</p
- …
