↓ Skip to main content

Evaluating the impact of Brexit on the pharmaceutical industry

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#38 of 432)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
26 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
126 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
Evaluating the impact of Brexit on the pharmaceutical industry
Published in
Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice, October 2017
DOI 10.1186/s40545-017-0120-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fawz Kazzazi, Cleo Pollard, Paul Tern, Alejandro Ayuso-Garcia, Jack Gillespie, Inesa Thomsen

Abstract

The UK Pharmaceutical Industry is arguably one of the most important industries to consider in the negotiations following the Brexit vote. Providing tens of thousands of jobs and billions in tax revenue and research investment, the importance of this industry cannot be understated. At stake is the global leadership in the sector, which produces some of the field's most influential basic science and translation work. However, interruptions and losses may occur at multiple levels, affecting patients, researchers, universities, companies and government. By understanding the current state of pharmaceutical sector, the potential effect of leaving the European Union (EU) on this successful industry can be better understood. This paper aims to address the priorities for negotiations by collating the analyses of professionals in the field, leading companies and non-EU member states. A government healthcare policy advisor and Chief Science Officer (CSO) for a major pharmaceutical firm were consulted to scope the paper. In these discussions, five key areas were identified: contribution, legislative processes, regulatory processes, research and outcomes, commercial risk. Multiple search engines were utilised for selecting relevant material, predominantly PubMed and Google Scholar. To supplement this information, Government documents were located using the "GOV.UK" publications tool, and interviews and commentaries were found through the Google News search function. With thorough investigation of the literature, we propose four foundations in the advancement of negotiations. These prioritise: negotiation of 'associated country' status, bilaterally favourable trade agreements, minimal interruption to regulatory bodies and special protection for the movement of workforce in the life sciences industry.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 26 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 126 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 126 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 30 24%
Student > Bachelor 16 13%
Researcher 8 6%
Student > Postgraduate 7 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 3%
Other 11 9%
Unknown 50 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 18 14%
Business, Management and Accounting 13 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 10%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 7 6%
Engineering 4 3%
Other 21 17%
Unknown 50 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 26 January 2019.
All research outputs
#1,788,854
of 23,505,064 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice
#38
of 432 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,114
of 324,078 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice
#2
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,505,064 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 432 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 324,078 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.