↓ Skip to main content

Nomenclature for renal replacement therapy in acute kidney injury: basic principles

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
56 tweeters
facebook
4 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
93 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
203 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
Nomenclature for renal replacement therapy in acute kidney injury: basic principles
Published in
Critical Care, October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13054-016-1489-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mauro Neri, Gianluca Villa, Francesco Garzotto, Sean Bagshaw, Rinaldo Bellomo, Jorge Cerda, Fiorenza Ferrari, Silvia Guggia, Michael Joannidis, John Kellum, Jeong Chul Kim, Ravindra L. Mehta, Zaccaria Ricci, Alberto Trevisani, Silvio Marafon, William R. Clark, Jean-Louis Vincent, Claudio Ronco

Abstract

This article reports the conclusions of a consensus expert conference on the basic principles and nomenclature of renal replacement therapy (RRT) currently utilized to manage acute kidney injury (AKI). This multidisciplinary consensus conference discusses common definitions, components, techniques, and operations of the machines and platforms used to deliver extracorporeal therapies, utilizing a "machine-centric" rather than a "patient-centric" approach. We provide a detailed description of the performance characteristics of membranes, filters, transmembrane transport of solutes and fluid, flows, and methods of measurement of delivered treatment, focusing on continuous renal replacement therapies (CRRT) which are utilized in the management of critically ill patients with AKI. This is a consensus report on nomenclature harmonization for principles of extracorporeal renal replacement therapies. Devices and operations are classified and defined in detail to serve as guidelines for future use of terminology in papers and research.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 56 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 203 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Czechia 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Unknown 199 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 27 13%
Student > Postgraduate 25 12%
Other 24 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 9%
Student > Master 16 8%
Other 54 27%
Unknown 39 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 116 57%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 3%
Engineering 6 3%
Neuroscience 4 2%
Other 14 7%
Unknown 49 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 33. 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 20 January 2018.
All research outputs
#822,371
of 19,006,945 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#711
of 5,548 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,896
of 280,605 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#2
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,006,945 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,548 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 280,605 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 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.