↓ Skip to main content

Potentially modifiable respiratory variables contributing to outcome in ICU patients without ARDS: a secondary analysis of PRoVENT

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
62 Mendeley
Title
Potentially modifiable respiratory variables contributing to outcome in ICU patients without ARDS: a secondary analysis of PRoVENT
Published in
Annals of Intensive Care, March 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13613-018-0385-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fabienne D. Simonis, Carmen S. V. Barbas, Antonio Artigas-Raventós, Jaume Canet, Rogier M. Determann, James Anstey, Goran Hedenstierna, Sabrine N. T. Hemmes, Greet Hermans, Michael Hiesmayr, Markus W. Hollmann, Samir Jaber, Ignacio Martin-Loeches, Gary H. Mills, Rupert M. Pearse, Christian Putensen, Werner Schmid, Paolo Severgnini, Roger Smith, Tanja A. Treschan, Edda M. Tschernko, Marcos F. Vidal Melo, Hermann Wrigge, Marcelo Gama de Abreu, Paolo Pelosi, Marcus J. Schultz, Ary Serpa Neto, For the PRoVENT investigators, The PROVE Network investigators

Abstract

The majority of critically ill patients do not suffer from acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). To improve the treatment of these patients, we aimed to identify potentially modifiable factors associated with outcome of these patients. The PRoVENT was an international, multicenter, prospective cohort study of consecutive patients under invasive mechanical ventilatory support. A predefined secondary analysis was to examine factors associated with mortality. The primary endpoint was all-cause in-hospital mortality. 935 Patients were included. In-hospital mortality was 21%. Compared to patients who died, patients who survived had a lower risk of ARDS according to the 'Lung Injury Prediction Score' and received lower maximum airway pressure (Pmax), driving pressure (ΔP), positive end-expiratory pressure, and FiO2 levels. Tidal volume size was similar between the groups. Higher Pmax was a potentially modifiable ventilatory variable associated with in-hospital mortality in multivariable analyses. ΔP was not independently associated with in-hospital mortality, but reliable values for ΔP were available for 343 patients only. Non-modifiable factors associated with in-hospital mortality were older age, presence of immunosuppression, higher non-pulmonary sequential organ failure assessment scores, lower pulse oximetry readings, higher heart rates, and functional dependence. Higher Pmax was independently associated with higher in-hospital mortality in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients under mechanical ventilatory support for reasons other than ARDS. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01868321).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 62 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 16%
Other 9 15%
Student > Master 6 10%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 6%
Other 11 18%
Unknown 17 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 40%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 8%
Engineering 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 21 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 26 March 2018.
All research outputs
#4,181,190
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Intensive Care
#480
of 1,074 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#81,829
of 333,710 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Intensive Care
#13
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,074 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 333,710 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.