↓ Skip to main content

Forces influencing generic drug development in the United States: a narrative review

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 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
Forces influencing generic drug development in the United States: a narrative review
Published in
Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40545-016-0079-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chia-Ying Lee, Xiaohan Chen, Robert J. Romanelli, Jodi B. Segal

Abstract

The United States (U.S.) Food and Drug Administration, as protectors of public health, encourages generic drug development and use so that patients can access affordable medications. The FDA, however, has limited mechanisms to encourage generic drug manufacturing. Generic drug manufacturers make decisions regarding development of products based on expected profitability, influenced by market forces, features of the reference listed drug, and manufacturing capabilities, as well as regulatory restrictions. Barriers to the development of generic drugs include the challenge of demonstrating bioequivalence of some products, particularly those that are considered to be complex generics. We present here a focused review describing the influences on generic manufacturers who are prioritizing drugs for generic development. We also review proposed strategies that regulators may use to incentivize generic drug development.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 53 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 17%
Researcher 8 15%
Student > Bachelor 6 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 18 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 9 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 11%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 5 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 6%
Other 8 15%
Unknown 18 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 May 2017.
All research outputs
#6,981,478
of 22,889,074 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice
#166
of 409 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#105,875
of 321,010 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice
#4
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,889,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 409 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 321,010 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.