ReviewDialogues in clinical neuroscience2016
Personalized prescribing: a new medical model for clinical implementation of psychotropic drugs.
Review in Dialogues in clinical neuroscience, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Disease-specific therapeutic plasma concentration ranges for quetiapine in schizophrenia, manic episode, depressive episode, and depressive comorbid insomnia.Discover mental health · 2026Article
- Exploratory focused pharmacogenetic testing reveals novel markers associated with risperidone pharmacokinetics in Saudi children with autism.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
- Effects of Pharmacokinetic Gene Variation on Therapeutic Drug Levels and Antidepressant Treatment Response.Pharmacopsychiatry · 2022Article
- Direct Powder Extrusion of Paracetamol Loaded Mixtures for 3D Printed Pharmaceutics for Personalized Medicine via Low Temperature Thermal Processing.Pharmaceutics · 2021Article
- Current challenges and possible future developments in personalized psychiatry with an emphasis on psychotic disorders.Heliyon · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The use of pharmacogenetic tests was already being proposed in psychiatry in the early 2000s because genetic factors were known to influence drug pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. However, sufficient levels of evidence to justify routine use have been achieved for only a few tests (eg, major histocompatibility complex, class I, B, allele 1502 [HLA-B*1502] for carbamazepine in epilepsy and bipolar disorders); many findings are too preliminary or, when replicated, of low clinical relevance because of a small effect size. Although drug selection and dose adaptation according to cytochrome P450 genotypes are sound, a large number of patients need to be genotyped in order to prevent one case of severe side effect and/or nonresponse. The decrease in cost for genetic analysis shifts the cost: benefit ratio toward increasing use of pharmacogenetic tests. However, they have to be combined with careful clinical evaluations and other tools (eg, therapeutic drug monitoring and phenotyping) to contribute to the general aim of providing the best care for psychiatric patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27757065PMC5067148W2535978492What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.