↓ Skip to main content

Pathways to new drug discovery in neuropsychiatry

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, November 2012
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 (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Pathways to new drug discovery in neuropsychiatry
Published in
BMC Medicine, November 2012
DOI 10.1186/1741-7015-10-151
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael Berk

Abstract

There is currently a crisis in drug discovery for neuropsychiatric disorders, with a profound, yet unexpected drought in new drug development across the spectrum. In this commentary, the sources of this dilemma and potential avenues to redress the issue are explored. These include a critical review of diagnostic issues and of selection of participants for clinical trials, and the mechanisms for identifying new drugs and new drug targets. Historically, the vast majority of agents have been discovered serendipitously or have been modifications of existing agents. Serendipitous discoveries, based on astute clinical observation or data mining, remain a valid option, as is illustrated by the suggestion in the paper by Wahlqvist and colleagues that treatment with sulfonylurea and metformin reduces the risk of affective disorder. However, the identification of agents targeting disorder-related biomarkers is currently proving particularly fruitful. There is considerable hope for genetics as a purist, pathophysiologically valid pathway to drug discovery; however, it is unclear whether the science is ready to meet this promise. Fruitful paradigms will require a break from the orthodoxy, and creativity and risk may well be the fingerprints of success.See related article http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7015/10/150.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 3%
Canada 1 3%
Unknown 32 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 18%
Other 3 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Student > Master 3 9%
Other 6 18%
Unknown 6 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 15%
Psychology 5 15%
Neuroscience 3 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Engineering 2 6%
Other 9 26%
Unknown 8 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 November 2012.
All research outputs
#3,926,079
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#2,050
of 3,613 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,893
of 282,372 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#45
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,613 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 44.6. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 282,372 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 62 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.