↓ Skip to main content

Duration of acute kidney injury in critically ill patients

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Intensive Care, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
35 Mendeley
Title
Duration of acute kidney injury in critically ill patients
Published in
Annals of Intensive Care, February 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13613-018-0374-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christine K. Federspiel, Theis S. Itenov, Kala Mehta, Raymond K. Hsu, Morten H. Bestle, Kathleen D. Liu

Abstract

Duration of acute kidney injury (AKI) has been recognized a risk factor for adverse outcomes following AKI. We sought to examine the relationship of AKI duration and recurrent AKI with short-term outcomes in critically ill patients who were mechanically ventilated and met criteria for the acute respiratory distress syndrome. Participants in the NHLBI ARDS Network SAILS multicenter trial who developed AKI were included in this analysis and divided into groups based on AKI duration. Differences in outcomes were evaluated using t test and Chi-square test. Competing risks regression and Cox regression were used to evaluate factors associated with resolving AKI and recurrent AKI. In total, 238 patients were included in the study. Seventy-seven patients had short duration AKI (1-2 days), 47 medium duration AKI (3-7 days), 87 persistent AKI (> 7 days) and 38 died during their AKI episode. Persistent AKI was associated with worse outcomes including increased ICU length of stay, time on the ventilator and days with cardiovascular failure. We found no clinical differences between patients with short and medium duration AKI, even when accounting for AKI severity and recurrent AKI. Patients with resolving AKI were less likely to have oliguria or moderate/severe ARDS on the day AKI criteria were met. Recurrent AKI was associated with poorer clinical outcomes. No baseline clinical factors were found to predict development of recurrent AKI. In critically ill patients with sepsis-associated ARDS and AKI, the impact of short and medium duration AKI on clinical outcomes was modest. Persistent and recurrent AKI were both associated with worse clinical outcomes, emphasizing the importance of identifying these patients, who may benefit from novel interventions.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 35 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 20%
Student > Master 5 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 11%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Researcher 3 9%
Other 8 23%
Unknown 5 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 46%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 7 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 12 March 2018.
All research outputs
#4,093,952
of 14,394,544 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Intensive Care
#308
of 636 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#97,686
of 274,450 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Intensive Care
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,394,544 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 636 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.3. 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 274,450 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them