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 |
Analysis of ex vivo drug response data of Plasmodium clinical isolates: the pros and cons of different computer programs and online platforms
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Malaria Journal, March 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12936-016-1173-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Grennady Wirjanata, Irene Handayuni, Sophie G. Zaloumis, Ferryanto Chalfein, Pak Prayoga, Enny Kenangalem, Jeanne Rini Poespoprodjo, Rintis Noviyanti, Julie A. Simpson, Ric N. Price, Jutta Marfurt |
| Abstract |
In vitro drug susceptibility testing of malaria parasites remains an important component of surveillance for anti-malarial drug resistance. The half-maximal inhibition of growth (IC50) is the most commonly reported parameter expressing drug susceptibility, derived by a variety of statistical approaches, each with its own advantages and disadvantages. In this study, licensed computer programs WinNonlin and GraphPad Prism 6.0, and the open access programs HN-NonLin, Antimalarial ICEstimator (ICE), and In Vitro Analysis and Reporting Tool (IVART) were tested for their ease of use and ability to estimate reliable IC50 values from raw drug response data from 31 Plasmodium falciparum and 29 P. vivax clinical isolates tested with five anti-malarial agents: chloroquine, amodiaquine, piperaquine, mefloquine, and artesunate. The IC50 and slope estimates were similar across all statistical packages for all drugs tested in both species. There was good correlation of results derived from alternative statistical programs and non-linear mixed-effects modelling (NONMEM) which models all isolate data simultaneously. The user-friendliness varied between packages. While HN-NonLin and IVART allow users to enter the data in 96-well format, IVART and GraphPad Prism 6.0 are capable to analyse multiple isolates and drugs in parallel. WinNonlin, GraphPad Prism 6.0, IVART, and ICE provide alerts for non-fitting data and incorrect data entry, facilitating data interpretation. Data analysis using WinNonlin or ICE took the longest computationally, whilst the offline ability of GraphPad Prism 6.0 to analyse multiple isolates and drugs simultaneously made it the fastest among the programs tested. IC50 estimates obtained from the programs tested were comparable. In view of processing time and ease of analysis, GraphPad Prism 6.0 or IVART are best suited for routine and large-scale drug susceptibility testing. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 4 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 42 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 9 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 10% |
| Lecturer | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 10% |
| Other | 6 | 14% |
| Unknown | 7 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 17% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 12% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 7% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 8 | 19% |
| Unknown | 13 | 31% |
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 08 March 2016.
All research outputs
#12,948,857
of 22,854,458 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#3,171
of 5,573 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#134,763
of 298,622 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#88
of 187 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,854,458 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,573 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 298,622 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 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 187 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.