Biomarkers of potential harm: Summary of an FDA-sponsored public workshop
Nicotine and Tobacco Research, ISSN: 1469-994X, Vol: 21, Issue: 1, Page: 3-13
2019
- 38Citations
- 30Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations38
- Citation Indexes36
- 36
- Policy Citations2
- 2
- Captures30
- Readers30
- 30
Review Description
Introduction: Since 2009, the United States (US) Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Center for Tobacco Products (CTP) has had the authority to regulate the manufacture, distribution, and marketing of tobacco products in order to reduce the death and disease caused by tobacco use. Biomarkers could play an important role across a number of FDA regulatory activities, including assessing new and modified risk tobacco products and identifying and evaluating potential product standards. Methods: On April 4-5, 2016, FDA/CTP hosted a public workshop focused on biomarkers of potential harm (BOPH) with participants from government, industry, academia, and other organizations. The workshop was divided into five sessions focused on: (1) overview of BOPH; (2) cardiovascular disease (CVD); (3) chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD); (4) cancer; and (5) new areas of research. Results and Conclusions: The deliberations from the workshop noted some promising BOPH but also highlighted the lack of systematic effort to identify BOPH that would have utility and validity for evaluating tobacco products. Research areas that could further strengthen the applicability of BOPH to tobacco regulatory science include the exploration of composite biomarkers as predictors of disease risk, “omics” biomarkers, and examining biomarkers using existing cohorts, surveys, and experimental studies. Implications: This paper synthesizes the main findings from the 2016 FDA-sponsored workshop focused on BOPH and highlights research areas that could further strengthen the science around BOPH and their applicability to tobacco regulatory science.
Bibliographic Details
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know