↓ Skip to main content

The negative effect of initial high-dose methylprednisolone and tapering regimen for acute respiratory distress syndrome: a retrospective propensity matched cohort study

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, June 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 (89th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
37 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
66 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
The negative effect of initial high-dose methylprednisolone and tapering regimen for acute respiratory distress syndrome: a retrospective propensity matched cohort study
Published in
Critical Care, June 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13054-017-1723-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Makoto Takaki, Kazuya Ichikado, Kodai Kawamura, Yasuhiro Gushima, Moritaka Suga

Abstract

The efficacy of corticosteroid use in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) remains controversial. Generally, short-term high-dose corticosteroid therapy is considered to be ineffective in ARDS. On the other hand, low-dose, long-term use of corticosteroids has been reported to be effective since they provide continued inhibition of the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) that accompanies ARDS. Thus far, no reports have been published on the efficacy of initiating treatment with a high-dose corticosteroid regimen with tapering. We conducted a retrospective observational study involving 186 patients treated at a teaching hospital (68% had sepsis, pneumonia, or aspiration pneumonia). ARDS was diagnosed according to the Berlin definition. Patients were divided into a high-dose (n = 21) or low-dose corticosteroid group (n = 165) to compare the effectiveness of a down-titration regimen. The primary medical team chose which treatment a patient would receive. We were careful to conduct a differential diagnosis of interstitial pneumonia (e.g., acute eosinophilic pneumonia) since corticosteroid treatment has been proven effective in that patient population. The primary outcome was the 60-day mortality rate. The secondary outcome was the number of ventilator-free days (VFD). Those started on a high-dose regimen had a significantly higher 60-day mortality rate (P = 0.031) with significantly fewer VFD (P = 0.021). Propensity scores were used to adjust patient backgrounds in a variable analysis that also showed the high-dose regimen was a factor in decreasing VFD (OR, 95.63; 95% CI, 1.74-5271.07; P = 0.026) and worsening the 60-day mortality rate (OR, 2.54; 95% CI, 0.92-7.02; P = 0.072). A tapering regimen after high-dose corticosteroids is likely to increase ventilator dependency and might aggravate the prognosis of patients with ARDS diagnosed according to the Berlin definition.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 37 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 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 66 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 14%
Researcher 8 12%
Student > Bachelor 7 11%
Other 6 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Other 13 20%
Unknown 18 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 44%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 5%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 19 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 23 August 2017.
All research outputs
#1,845,566
of 25,800,372 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#1,629
of 6,623 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,721
of 332,590 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#30
of 85 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,800,372 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 6,623 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 332,590 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 85 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 64% of its contemporaries.