| Title |
Sertindole for schizophrenia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2005
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd001715.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ruth Lewis, Anne-Marie Bagnall, Maria Leitner |
| Abstract |
Sertindole is an atypical antipsychotic, which is thought to give a lower incidence of extrapyramidal side effects at clinically effective doses than typical antipsychotic drugs. In December 1998, Lundbeck Ltd., the manufacturers of sertindole, voluntarily suspended the availability of the drug due to concerns about cardiac arrhythmia and sudden cardiac death associated with its use. However, based on the advice of an appointed expert group, the Committee for Proprietary Medicinal Products (CPMP) lifted the suspension of sertindole in October 2001, a decision that was ratified by the European Commission on the 26th of June 2002. Lundbeck have committed to the CPMP to carry out two post-marketing surveillance (PMS) studies (which were initiated in July 2002) to provide additional epidemiological data under conditions of normal drug usage. Initial marketing of the product will be restricted and Lundbeck is currently in discussions with the US health authorities (FDA) to investigate whether, and if so when, it would be possible to launch Serdolect in the US market. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Ireland | 1 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 157 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 2 | 1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Finland | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 153 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 23 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 20 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 18 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 16 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 6% |
| Other | 31 | 20% |
| Unknown | 39 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 63 | 40% |
| Psychology | 17 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 6 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 14 | 9% |
| Unknown | 43 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 August 2020.
All research outputs
#3,612,005
of 22,721,584 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,096
of 12,314 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,294
of 57,261 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#12
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,721,584 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,314 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 57,261 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.