↓ Skip to main content

Procalcitonin-guided diagnosis and antibiotic stewardship revisited

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, January 2017
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 (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
24 news outlets
blogs
3 blogs
twitter
45 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
223 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
497 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
Procalcitonin-guided diagnosis and antibiotic stewardship revisited
Published in
BMC Medicine, January 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12916-017-0795-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ramon Sager, Alexander Kutz, Beat Mueller, Philipp Schuetz

Abstract

Several controlled clinical studies have evaluated the potential of the infection biomarker procalcitonin (PCT) to improve the diagnostic work-up of patients with bacterial infections and its influence on decisions regarding antibiotic therapy. Most research has focused on lower respiratory tract infections and critically ill sepsis patients. A clinical utility for PCT has also been found for patients with urinary tract infections, postoperative infections, meningitis, and patients with acute heart failure with possible superinfection (i.e., pneumonia). In these indications, PCT levels measured on hospital admission were found to substantially reduce the initiation of antibiotic treatment in low-risk situations (i.e., bronchitis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation). For more severe infections (i.e., pneumonia, sepsis), antibiotic stewardship by monitoring of PCT kinetics resulted in shorter antibiotic treatment durations with early cessation of therapy. Importantly, these strategies appear to be safe without increasing the risk for mortality, recurrent infections, or treatment failures. PCT kinetics also proved to have prognostic value correlating with disease severity (i.e., pancreatitis, abdominal infection) and resolution of illness (i.e., sepsis). Although promising findings have been published in these different types of infections, there are a number of limitations regarding PCT, including suboptimal sensitivity and/or specificity, which makes a careful interpretation of PCT in the clinical context mandatory. This narrative review aims to update clinicians on the strengths and limitations of PCT for patient management, focusing on research conducted within the last 4 years.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 45 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 497 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Pakistan 1 <1%
Unknown 493 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 73 15%
Student > Postgraduate 59 12%
Student > Master 51 10%
Researcher 49 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 38 8%
Other 119 24%
Unknown 108 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 256 52%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 23 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 16 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 12 2%
Other 49 10%
Unknown 122 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 216. 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 01 November 2022.
All research outputs
#175,908
of 25,101,232 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#158
of 3,928 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,016
of 430,111 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#4
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,101,232 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,928 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 45.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 430,111 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 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 95% of its contemporaries.