↓ Skip to main content

New aspects in the management of pneumonia

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, October 2016
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)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
27 tweeters
facebook
5 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
142 Mendeley
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.
Title
New aspects in the management of pneumonia
Published in
Critical Care, October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13054-016-1442-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elena Prina, Adrian Ceccato, Antoni Torres

Abstract

Despite improvements in the management of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), morbidity and mortality are still high, especially in patients with more severe disease. Early and appropriate antibiotics remain the cornerstone in the treatment of CAP. However, two aspects seem to contribute to a worse outcome: an uncontrolled inflammatory reaction and an inadequate immune response. Adjuvant treatments, such as corticosteroids and intravenous immunoglobulins, have been proposed to counterbalance these effects. The use of corticosteroids in patients with severe CAP and a strong inflammatory reaction can reduce the time to clinical stability, the risk of treatment failure, and the risk of progression to acute respiratory distress syndrome. The administration of intravenous immunoglobulins seems to reinforce the immune response to the infection in particular in patients with inadequate levels of antibodies and when an enriched IgM preparation has been used; however, more studies are needed to determinate their impact on outcome and to define the population that will receive more benefit.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 27 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 142 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%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 139 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 22 15%
Student > Master 19 13%
Other 17 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 11%
Researcher 10 7%
Other 30 21%
Unknown 28 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 91 64%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 2%
Arts and Humanities 1 <1%
Other 5 4%
Unknown 33 23%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 21 March 2018.
All research outputs
#1,412,516
of 19,973,273 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#1,320
of 5,666 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,243
of 288,512 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#10
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,973,273 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 5,666 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 288,512 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 52 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.