| Title |
The challenge of admitting the very elderly to intensive care
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annals of Intensive Care, August 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/2110-5820-1-29 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yên-Lan Nguyen, Derek C Angus, Ariane Boumendil, Bertrand Guidet |
| Abstract |
The aging of the population has increased the demand for healthcare resources. The number of patients aged 80 years and older admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) increased during the past decade, as has the intensity of care for such patients. Yet, many physicians remain reluctant to admit the oldest, arguing a "squandering" of societal resources, that ICU care could be deleterious, or that ICU care may not actually be what the patient or family wants in this instance. Other ICU physicians are strong advocates for admission of a selected elderly population. These discrepant opinions may partly be explained by the current lack of validated criteria to select accurately the patients (of any age) who will benefit most from ICU hospitalization. This review describes the epidemiology of the elderly aged 80 years and older admitted in the ICU, their long-term outcomes, and to discuss some of the solutions to cope with the burden of an aging population receiving acute care hospitalization. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 13% |
| Spain | 1 | 13% |
| Malaysia | 1 | 13% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 13% |
| Australia | 1 | 13% |
| Sweden | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 2 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 25% |
| Scientists | 2 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 160 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 3 | 2% |
| France | 2 | 1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 152 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 23 | 14% |
| Researcher | 22 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 18 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 15 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 15 | 9% |
| Other | 31 | 19% |
| Unknown | 36 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 93 | 58% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 1% |
| Psychology | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 6 | 4% |
| Unknown | 42 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 29 March 2022.
All research outputs
#1,845,437
of 23,443,716 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Intensive Care
#230
of 1,069 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,640
of 121,109 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Intensive Care
#2
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,443,716 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,069 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 121,109 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 7 of them.