Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24327237›Full record

ArticleClinical pharmacokinetics2014

Reporting a population pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic study: a journal's perspective.

Kris M Jamsen, Sarah C McLeay, Michael A Barras, Bruce Green

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical pharmacokinetics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 10 pooled it
–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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Modelling pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the selective S1PBritish journal of clinical pharmacology · 2020
    Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Population Pharmacokinetics of Amikacin in Non-Neonatal Pediatric Patients: A Scoping Review.European journal of drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics · 2026
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

4 authors.

Kris M JamsenModel Answers Pty Ltd, Suites 3-4, 333 Ann St, Brisbane, QLD, 4000, Australia, kjamsen96@gmail.com.
Sarah C McLeay
Michael A Barras
Bruce Green

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The key purpose of performing pharmacometric research is to aid optimization of drug dosing strategies. The statistical techniques required for this research are advanced, which can make interpretation of results difficult to convey to the target audience if they are unfamiliar with pharmacometric concepts. This article provides a basic guide for authors who wish to publish pharmacometric analyses in peer-reviewed journals. This guide is intended to enhance the readability, reproducibility and understanding of the work for a general readership, which may include clinicians, pharmacists and pharmacometricians. Presentation techniques and examples are offered, as well as a checklist of suggested contents for the manuscript.

Indexed as

Models, BiologicalPharmacokineticsResearch DesignBiomedical ResearchData Interpretation, StatisticalHumansPublishing

Identifiers

PMID24327237

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.