↓ Skip to main content

Urinalysis and pre-renal acute kidney injury: time to move on

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, May 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Urinalysis and pre-renal acute kidney injury: time to move on
Published in
Critical Care, May 2013
DOI 10.1186/cc12676
Pubmed ID
Authors

Antoine G Schneider, Rinaldo Bellomo

Abstract

Urinary indices are classically believed to allow differentiation of transient (or pre-renal) acute kidney injury (AKI) from persistent (or acute tubular necrosis) AKI. However, the data validating urinalysis in critically ill patients are weak. In the previous issue of Critical Care, Pons and colleagues demonstrate in a multicenter observational study that sodium and urea excretion fractions as well as urinary over plasma ratios performed poorly as diagnostic tests to separate such entities. This study confirms the limited diagnostic and prognostic ability of urine testing. Together with other studies, this study raises more fundamental questions about the value, meaning and pathophysiologic validity of the pre-renal AKI paradigm and suggests that AKI (like all other forms of organ injury) is a continuum of injury that cannot be neatly divided into functional (pre-renal or transient) or structural (acute tubular necrosis or persistent).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 16%
Other 4 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Other 11 29%
Unknown 8 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 50%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Unspecified 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 9 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 07 May 2013.
All research outputs
#7,355,930
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#4,041
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#59,083
of 205,285 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#56
of 127 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,554 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 205,285 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 127 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 55% of its contemporaries.