You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
When to start renal replacement therapy in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury: comment on AKIKI and ELAIN
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Care, August 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13054-016-1424-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sean M. Bagshaw, François Lamontagne, Michael Joannidis, Ron Wald |
| Abstract |
The dilemma of whether and when to start renal replacement therapy among critically ill patients with acute kidney injury in the absence of conventional indications has long been a vexing challenge for clinicians. The lack of high-quality evidence has undoubtedly contributed decisional uncertainty and unnecessary practice variation. Recently, two randomized trials (ELAIN and AKIKI) reported specifically on the issue of the timing of initiation of renal replacement therapy in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury. In this commentary, their fundamental differences in trial design, sample size, and widely discrepant findings are considered in context. While both trials are important contributions towards informing practice on this issue, additional evidence from large multicenter randomized trials is needed. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 55 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 10 | 18% |
| United States | 6 | 11% |
| France | 3 | 5% |
| Canada | 3 | 5% |
| Malaysia | 2 | 4% |
| Mexico | 2 | 4% |
| Spain | 2 | 4% |
| Germany | 1 | 2% |
| Ireland | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 7 | 13% |
| Unknown | 18 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 37 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 11 | 20% |
| Scientists | 5 | 9% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 96 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Greece | 1 | 1% |
| Italy | 1 | 1% |
| South Africa | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 93 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 19 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 17% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 15 | 16% |
| Professor | 7 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 7% |
| Other | 19 | 20% |
| Unknown | 13 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 69 | 72% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 2% |
| Mathematics | 1 | 1% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 1% |
| Psychology | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 3 | 3% |
| Unknown | 19 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 31. 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 31 May 2019.
All research outputs
#1,302,717
of 25,646,963 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#1,102
of 6,599 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,627
of 382,491 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#43
of 107 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,646,963 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,599 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 382,491 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 107 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 59% of its contemporaries.