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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Challenges in orphan drug development and regulatory policy in China
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, January 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13023-017-0568-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alice Cheng, Zhi Xie |
| Abstract |
While regulatory policy is well defined for orphan drug development in the United States and Europe, rare disease policy in China is still evolving. Many Chinese patients currently pay out of pocket for international treatments that are not yet approved in China. The lack of a clear definition and therefore regulatory approval process for rare diseases has, until now, de-incentivized pharmaceutical companies to pursue rare disease drug development in China. In turn, many grassroots movements have begun to support rare disease patients and facilitate drug discovery through research. Recently, the Chinese FDA set new regulatory guidelines for drugs being developed in China, including an expedited review process for life-saving treatments. In this review, we discuss the effects of these new policy changes on and suggest potential solutions to innovate orphan drug development in China. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 25% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 47 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 13% |
| Other | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 9% |
| Researcher | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 9% |
| Unknown | 18 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 9 | 19% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 13% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 9% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 6 | 13% |
| Unknown | 18 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 02 March 2017.
All research outputs
#13,292,187
of 22,940,083 outputs
Outputs from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#1,360
of 2,635 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#205,386
of 418,282 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#23
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,940,083 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,635 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 418,282 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 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.