Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22923867›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of pharmaceutical sciences2011

Formulation and development of metered dose inhalations of salbutamol in solution form.

Anubha Khale, Amrita Bajaj

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Indian journal of pharmaceutical sciences, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Anubha KhaleM. E. S. Instititute's, H. K. College of Pharmacy, Pratikshanagar, Jogeshwari (W), Mumbai-400 102, India.
Amrita Bajaj

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the present study attempts were made to prepare metered dose inhalation of salbutamol in solution form and compared it with the marketed metered dose inhalation in suspension form. Solution form of the drug was found better than marketed suspension formulation with respect to homogeneity and content uniformity. Propellant blend P-11 and P-12 in the proportion 30:70 was selected as it gave optimum vapour pressure. Surfactant oleic acid in concentration 10 mg per can was selected as it gave best results with clarity, spray pattern, vapour pressure, content per spray and rate of evaporation. Ethyl alcohol 2 ml per can was used as a cosolvent to give a clear solution, optimum vapour pressure, maximum content per spray and fair rate of evaporation. The selected formulation was subjected to the physico-chemical evaluation tests as per the standard pharmacopoeial procedures and the characteristics of the formulations were further compared with a conventional marketed formulation. In vitro study reveled the net respirable fraction was better than marketed preparation.

Indexed as

Cosolventnet respirable fractionpropellant blendspray pattern

Identifiers

PMID22923867
PMCPMC3425066

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.