| Title |
The perspectives of patients with lithium-induced end-stage renal disease
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Bipolar Disorders, June 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40345-018-0121-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Angèle P. M. Kerckhoffs, Erwin G. T. M. Hartong, Koen P. Grootens |
| Abstract |
Lithium is the treatment of choice for patients suffering from bipolar disorder (BD) but prolonged use induces renal dysfunction in at least 20% of patient. Intensive monitoring of kidney functioning helps to reveal early decline in renal failure. This study investigates the views and experiences of BD patients who have developed end-stage renal disease and were receiving renal replacement therapy. The patients overall reported not to have been offered alternative treatment options at the start of lithium therapy or when renal functions deteriorated. All indicated to have lacked sound information and dialogue in accordance with shared decision making. Kidney monitoring was inadequate in many cases and decision making rushed. Retrospectively, the treatment and monitoring of lithium and the information process were inadequate in many cases. We give suggestions on how to inform patients taking lithium for their BD timely and adequately on the course of renal function loss in the various stages of their treatment. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 17% |
| United States | 1 | 17% |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 17% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 2 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 100% |
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 > Bachelor | 7 | 20% |
| Researcher | 6 | 17% |
| Other | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 17% |
| Unknown | 7 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 26% |
| Psychology | 7 | 20% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 14% |
| Engineering | 2 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 9 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 15 June 2020.
All research outputs
#3,131,585
of 24,357,902 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Bipolar Disorders
#86
of 312 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,407
of 334,112 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Bipolar Disorders
#4
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,357,902 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 312 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 334,112 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 81% of its contemporaries.
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. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.