Considerations on Data Analysis Using Computer Methods and Currently Available Software for Personal Computers

  • M. Gex-Fabry
  • L. P. Balant
Part of the Handbook of Experimental Pharmacology book series (HEP, volume 110)


The early stages of computer science in the 1940s, before it started to interfere more or less obviously with everybody’s life, were relatively discreet. The 1980s were marked by the first personal computers (PCs), which subsequently have gained access to an increasing number of offices and homes. During the same period, education in computer use and programming became increasingly popular so that few domains now remain untouched by the computer phenomenon.


Error Model Steep Descent Method Pharmacodynamic Model Hospital Pharmacist Extend Little Square 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Amisaki T, Tatsuhara T (1988) An alternative two stage method via the EMalgorithm for the estimation of population pharmacokinetic parameters. J Pharmacobiodyn 11: 335–348PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Balant LP, Garrett ER (1983) Computer use in pharmacokinetics. In: Garrett ER, Hirtz JL (eds) Drug fate and metabolism. Dekker, New York, pp 1–150Google Scholar
  3. Berman M, Shahn E, Weiss MF (1962) The routine fitting of kinetic data to models: a mathematical formalism for digital computers. Biophys J 2: 275–287PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boxenbaum HG, Riegelman S, Elashoff RM (1974) Statistical estimations in pharmacokinetics. J Pharmacokinet Biopharm 2: 123–148PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Di Stefano JJ, Landaw EM (1984) Multiexponential, multicompartmental, and noncompartmental modeling: I. Methodological limitations and physiological interpretations. Am J Physiol 246: R651–R664Google Scholar
  6. Holford NHG, Sheiner LB (1982) Kinetics of pharmacologic response. Pharmacol Ther 16: 143–166PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Kennedy WJ, Gentle JE (1980) Statistical computing. Dekker, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Landaw EM, Di Stefano J J (1984) Multiexponential, multicompartmental, and noncompartmental modeling: II. Data analysis and statistical considerations. Am J Physiol 246: R665–R677PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Oosterhuis B, Van Boxtel CJ (1988) Kinetics of drug effect in man. Ther Drug Monit 10: 121–132PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Press WH, Flannery BP, Teukolsky SAS, Vetterling WT (1986) Numerical recipes. The art of scientific computing. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  11. Sebaldt RJ, Kreeft JH (1987) Efficient pharmacokinetic modeling of complex clinical dosing regimens: the universal elementary dosing regimen and computer algorithm EDFAST. J Pharm Sci 76: 93–100PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Sheiner LB, Beal SL (1982) Bayesian individualization of pharmacokinetics: simple implementation and comparison with non-bayesian methods. J Pharm Sci 71: 1344–1348PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Sheiner LB, Beal SL (1984) Estimation of altered kinetics in populations. In: Benet LZ et al. (eds) Pharmacokinetic basis for drug treatment. Raven, New York, pp 357–365Google Scholar
  14. Skelly J (1990) Regulatory recommendations in USA on investigation and evaluation of oral controlled release products. In: Gundert-Remy U, Moller H (eds) Oral controlled release products: therapeutic and biopharmaceutic assessment. Wissenschaftliche Verlagsgesellschaft, Stuttgart, pp 175–193Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Gex-Fabry
  • L. P. Balant

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations