↓ Skip to main content

Lithium nephrotoxicity

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Bipolar Disorders, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
11 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
66 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
106 Mendeley
Title
Lithium nephrotoxicity
Published in
International Journal of Bipolar Disorders, June 2015
DOI 10.1186/s40345-015-0028-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Abed N. Azab, Alla Shnaider, Yamima Osher, Dana Wang, Yuly Bersudsky, R. H. Belmaker

Abstract

Reports of toxic effects on the kidney of lithium treatment emerged very soon after lithium therapy was introduced. Lithium-induced nephrogenic diabetes insipidus is usually self-limiting or not clinically dangerous. Some reports of irreversible chronic kidney disease and renal failure were difficult to attribute to lithium treatment since chronic kidney disease and renal failure exist in the population at large. In recent years, large-scale epidemiological studies have convincingly shown that lithium treatment elevates the risk of chronic kidney disease and renal failure. Most patients do not experience renal side effects. The most common side effect of polyuria only weakly predicts increasing creatinine or reduced kidney function. Among those patients who do experience decrease in creatinine clearance, some may require continuation of lithium treatment even as their creatinine increases. Other patients may be able to switch to a different mood stabilizer medication, but kidney function may continue to deteriorate even after lithium cessation. Most, but not all, evidence today recommends using a lower lithium plasma level target for long-term maintenance and thereby reducing risks of severe nephrotoxicity.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 104 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 24 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 8%
Student > Postgraduate 9 8%
Student > Master 9 8%
Researcher 8 8%
Other 20 19%
Unknown 27 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 42 40%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 5%
Neuroscience 4 4%
Other 10 9%
Unknown 31 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 June 2023.
All research outputs
#2,432,101
of 25,707,225 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Bipolar Disorders
#64
of 329 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,978
of 281,545 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Bipolar Disorders
#2
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,707,225 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 329 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 281,545 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.