↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Gabapentin enacarbil extended release for the treatment of postherpetic neuralgia in adults

Overview of attention for article published in Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, November 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

googleplus
1 Google+ user
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 Mendeley
Title
Gabapentin enacarbil extended release for the treatment of postherpetic neuralgia in adults
Published in
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, November 2013
DOI 10.2147/tcrm.s50212
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ben M Thomas, Paul Farquhar-Smith

Abstract

The development of biomedical technology is allowing refinement of drug therapies in order to improve medication profiles and benefit patients. Gabapentin (Gp) is a medication licensed globally for various indications, including postherpetic neuralgia. It has a pharmacokinetic profile which has been suggested may limit its clinical effects and reduce medication compliance. In 2012, the US Food and Drug Administration licensed a novel preparation which aims to circumvent these limitations. Gp enacarbil is a prodrug of Gp, which is additionally prepared in an extended release preparation. The resulting compound has an improved absorption profile and a reduced dosing frequency in comparison to immediate release Gp. An absence of comparative data, however, limits the direct evaluation of the medication to both immediate release and other extended release preparations available on the market. Additionally, no data are currently available addressing efficacy, tolerability, or side effects with other first line treatments of postherpetic neuralgia. Additional experimental data should be sought to clarify the position of Gp enacarbil, both within postherpetic neuralgia treatment protocols and in relation to the increasing numbers of gabapentinoids available.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 5%
Switzerland 1 5%
Egypt 1 5%
Unknown 16 84%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 3 16%
Student > Master 3 16%
Researcher 2 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 11%
Student > Bachelor 1 5%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 6 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 47%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 11%
Neuroscience 1 5%
Social Sciences 1 5%
Unknown 6 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 01 December 2013.
All research outputs
#16,721,208
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#809
of 1,323 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#136,834
of 226,635 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#8
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,323 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 226,635 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.