Skip to main content
Log in

Literature growth in pharmacokinetics

  • Published:
Journal of Pharmacokinetics and Biopharmaceutics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The literature growth in pharmacokinetics and bioavailability between the years 1964 and 1980 is analyzed. During much of this period, the literature doubled approximately every 1.6 years. However, during the period 1978–1980, little or no growth was observed. During the period 1950–1967, the total chemical literature increased exponentially with a half-life of 8.28 years; between 1968 and 1980, the half-life was 12.4 years. Thus, the pharmacokinetic literature increased at a much more rapid pace than did the total chemical literature in general. The subject of growth is considered in a general context, particularly as influenced by psychological, sociological, political, and economic factors. It is concluded that while mathematical functions may adequately describe past literature trends, they have little if any utility in predicting future trends in specific research areas such as pharmacokinetics.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. J. G. Wagner. History of pharmacokinetics.Pharmacol. Ther. 12: 537–562 (1981).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. A. Buchanan. Physiological effects of the inhalation of ether.London Med. Gaz. 39:715–717 (1847).

    Google Scholar 

  3. R. A. Butler. Pharmacokinetics of halothane and ether.Br. J. Anesth. 36:193–199 (1964).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. E. Borek. The loneliness of the original investigator.Nature 264:100 (1976).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. E. Garfield. Current comments.Current Contents (Life Sciences),No. 43, Oct. 26, 1981, pp. 5–12.

    Google Scholar 

  6. J. Lentine, Managing Editor of International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, personal communication.

  7. D. R. Tousignaut, Editor of International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, personal communication.

  8. R. Mehnert, of the National Library of Medicine (Publisher of Index Medicus), personal communication.

  9. G. O. Platau, Senior Assistant, editorial operations of Chemical Abstracts Service, personal communication.

  10. D. B. Baker. Recent trends in chemical literature growth.Chem. Eng. News, June 1, 1981, pp. 29–34.

  11. CAS Today: Facts and Figures about Chemical Abstracts Service, a brochure published in 1980 by Chemical Abstracts Service, a division of the American Chemical Society, Columbus, Ohio.

  12. J. G. Wagner.Biopharmaceutics and Relevant Pharmacokinetics. Drug Intelligence Publications, Hamilton, Ill., 1971, 1st ed., p. 2.

    Google Scholar 

  13. L. von Bertalanffy.General System Theory: Foundations, Development, Applications, rev. ed., George Braziller, New York, 1968, p. 103.

    Google Scholar 

  14. M. Haire. Biological models and empirical histories of the growth of organizations. In M. Haire (ed.),Modern Organization Theory, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1959, chap. 10, pp. 272–306.

    Google Scholar 

  15. J. G. Wagner. Relations between drug concentration and response.J. Mond. Pharm. 4: 279–310 (1971).

    Google Scholar 

  16. K. E. Boulding. Toward a general theory of growth.General Systems 1:66–75 (1956).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Boxenbaum, H. Literature growth in pharmacokinetics. Journal of Pharmacokinetics and Biopharmaceutics 10, 335–348 (1982). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01059265

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01059265

Key words

Navigation