↓ Skip to main content

High protein intake without concerns?

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, May 2017
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 (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
43 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
88 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
High protein intake without concerns?
Published in
Critical Care, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13054-017-1699-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Olav Rooyackers, Martin Sundström Rehal, Felix Liebau, Åke Norberg, Jan Wernerman

Abstract

The high fashion in nutrition for the critically ill is to recommend a high protein intake. Several opinion leaders are surfing on this wave, expanding the suggested protein allowance upwards. At the same time, there is no new evidence supporting this change in recommendations. Observational data show that in clinical practice protein intake is most often far below current ESPEN recommendations of 1.2-1.5 g/kg/day. Therefore, it may be in the best interests of our patients just to adhere to that guideline, and not to stretch them upwards for protein intake? Here we give arguments to stay conservative.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 43 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 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 88 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 14%
Other 11 13%
Student > Bachelor 10 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 9 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 8%
Other 25 28%
Unknown 14 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 38%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 23%
Unspecified 3 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 7 8%
Unknown 21 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. 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 06 September 2017.
All research outputs
#1,120,305
of 21,337,804 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#1,011
of 5,804 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,512
of 284,314 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#5
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,337,804 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 5,804 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 284,314 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.