| Title |
Acute kidney injury in the ICU: from injury to recovery: reports from the 5th Paris International Conference
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annals of Intensive Care, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13613-017-0260-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rinaldo Bellomo, Claudio Ronco, Ravindra L. Mehta, Pierre Asfar, Julie Boisramé-Helms, Michael Darmon, Jean-Luc Diehl, Jacques Duranteau, Eric A. J. Hoste, Joannes-Boyau Olivier, Matthieu Legrand, Nicolas Lerolle, Manu L. N. G. Malbrain, Johan Mårtensson, Heleen M. Oudemans-van Straaten, Jean-Jacques Parienti, Didier Payen, Sophie Perinel, Esther Peters, Peter Pickkers, Eric Rondeau, Miet Schetz, Christophe Vinsonneau, Julia Wendon, Ling Zhang, Pierre-François Laterre |
| Abstract |
The French Intensive Care Society organized its yearly Paris International Conference in intensive care on June 18-19, 2015. The main purpose of this meeting is to gather the best experts in the field in order to provide the highest quality update on a chosen topic. In 2015, the selected theme was: "Acute Renal Failure in the ICU: from injury to recovery." The conference program covered multiple aspects of renal failure, including epidemiology, diagnosis, treatment and kidney support system, prognosis and recovery together with acute renal failure in specific settings. The present report provides a summary of every presentation including the key message and references and is structured in eight sections: (a) diagnosis and evaluation, (b) old and new diagnosis tools, |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 41 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 4 | 10% |
| Mexico | 4 | 10% |
| Belgium | 3 | 7% |
| United States | 3 | 7% |
| South Africa | 2 | 5% |
| Australia | 2 | 5% |
| Japan | 1 | 2% |
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| Russia | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 9 | 22% |
| Unknown | 11 | 27% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 26 | 63% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 9 | 22% |
| Scientists | 6 | 15% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 307 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 307 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 42 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 34 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 33 | 11% |
| Researcher | 29 | 9% |
| Other | 27 | 9% |
| Other | 65 | 21% |
| Unknown | 77 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 143 | 47% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 23 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 10 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 10 | 3% |
| Other | 25 | 8% |
| Unknown | 86 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. 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 01 August 2022.
All research outputs
#1,567,481
of 25,728,855 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Intensive Care
#176
of 1,211 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,451
of 325,270 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Intensive Care
#5
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,728,855 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,211 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 325,270 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.