| Title |
Prognostic factors in the acute respiratory distress syndrome
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical and Translational Medicine, July 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40169-015-0065-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Wei Chen, Lorraine B Ware |
| Abstract |
Despite improvements in critical care, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) remains a devastating clinical problem with high rates of morbidity and mortality. A better understanding of the prognostic factors associated with ARDS is crucial for facilitating risk stratification and developing new therapeutic interventions that aim to improve clinical outcomes. In this article, we present an up-to-date summary of factors that predict mortality in ARDS in four categories: (1) clinical characteristics; (2) physiological parameters and oxygenation; (3) genetic polymorphisms and biomarkers; and (4) scoring systems. In addition, we discuss how a better understanding of clinical and basic pathogenic mechanisms can help to inform prognostication, decision-making, risk stratification, treatment selection, and improve study design for clinical trials. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 34 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 21% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 15% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 5 | 15% |
| Unknown | 6 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 59% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 9% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Sports and Recreations | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 7 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 07 April 2020.
All research outputs
#17,286,379
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Clinical and Translational Medicine
#571
of 1,060 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#165,266
of 277,587 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical and Translational Medicine
#6
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,060 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 277,587 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.