ArticleBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2017
Why standards are useful for predicting doses.
Article in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Analgesic efficacy and pharmacokinetics of epidural oxycodone in pain management after gynaecological laparoscopy-A randomised, double blind, active control, double-dummy clinical comparison with intravenous administration.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2019Trial
- Population Pharmacokinetic Modelling of Dolutegravir: A Narrative Review.Clinical pharmacokinetics · 2026Review
- Propofol: A Medication That Changed Pediatric Anesthesia Practice.Paediatric anaesthesia · 2025Review
- All You Need to Know About Allometric Scaling: An Integrative Review on the Theoretical Basis, Empirical Evidence, and Application in Human Pharmacology.Clinical pharmacokinetics · 2025Review
- Population pharmacokinetic analysis identifies an absorption process model for mycophenolic acid in patients with renal transplant.Clinical and translational science · 2024Article
- Serum ganciclovir drug exposure in children receiving standard ganciclovir dosing.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2024Article
- Population pharmacokinetics of benznidazole in neonates, infants and children using a new pediatric formulation.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2023Article
- Acetaminophen pharmacokinetics in infants and children with congenital heart disease.Paediatric anaesthesia · 2023Article
- Integrative population pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic analysis of nemonoxacin capsule in Chinese patients with community-acquired pneumonia.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Article
- Population Pharmacokinetic Modelling of Acetaminophen and Ibuprofen: the Influence of Body Composition, Formulation and Feeding in Healthy Adult Volunteers.European journal of drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics · 2022Article
- Pharmacokinetic Pharmacodynamic Modelling Contributions to Improve Paediatric Anaesthesia Practice.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Population pharmacokinetics of olanzapine in children.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2021Article
- Effect of SLCO1B1 Polymorphisms on High-Dose Methotrexate Clearance in Children and Young Adults With Leukemia and Lymphoblastic Lymphoma.Clinical and translational science · 2021Observational
- Why standards are useful for predicting doses.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Germovsek and colleagues have recently concluded that a standard approach to modelling pharmacokinetics is not wrong and appears to be at least as useful as other ad hoc methods for describing drug concentrations. There are other advantages of this approach including learning about biology, comparing different studies, detecting errors and rationalizing dose prediction. A standard approach to size and maturation is not a panacea but provides the framework for challenging new ideas and supports a consistent method of dosing in patients of all ages.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.