Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24623084›Full record

ArticleJournal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics2014

Use of a linearization approximation facilitating stochastic model building.

Elin M Svensson, Mats O Karlsson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, 2014. 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. Trial
  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.

Elin M SvenssonDepartment of Pharmaceutical Biosciences, Uppsala University, P.O. Box 591, 751 24, Uppsala, Sweden, elin.svensson@farmbio.uu.se.
Mats O Karlsson

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The objective of this work was to facilitate the development of nonlinear mixed effects models by establishing a diagnostic method for evaluation of stochastic model components. The random effects investigated were between subject, between occasion and residual variability. The method was based on a first-order conditional estimates linear approximation and evaluated on three real datasets with previously developed population pharmacokinetic models. The results were assessed based on the agreement in difference in objective function value between a basic model and extended models for the standard nonlinear and linearized approach respectively. The linearization was found to accurately identify significant extensions of the model's stochastic components with notably decreased runtimes as compared to the standard nonlinear analysis. The observed gain in runtimes varied between four to more than 50-fold and the largest gains were seen for models with originally long runtimes. This method may be especially useful as a screening tool to detect correlations between random effects since it substantially quickens the estimation of large variance-covariance blocks. To expedite the application of this diagnostic tool, the linearization procedure has been automated and implemented in the software package PsN.

Indexed as

Models, BiologicalNonlinear DynamicsPharmacokineticsStochastic ProcessesEthambutolHumansImidazolesPefloxacinSoftwareEthambutolImidazolesmoxonidinePefloxacin

Identifiers

PMID24623084
PMCPMC3969514

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.