↓ Skip to main content

Clinical significance of measuring plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 in sepsis

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Intensive Care, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 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
Clinical significance of measuring plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 in sepsis
Published in
Journal of Intensive Care, September 2017
DOI 10.1186/s40560-017-0250-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Toshiaki Iba, Jecko Thachil

Abstract

Disseminated thrombotic process in the microcirculation is considered to be an important cause of multiple organ dysfunction in sepsis. The fundamental purpose of this prothrombotic change was believed to be in the host defense against microbial dissemination. In that process, antifibrinolytic property plays an important role. For the understanding of pathophysiology of sepsis, it is quite useful to grasp the alterations in coagulation/fibrinolytic parameters, i.e., plasminogen activator and plasminogen activator inhibitor-1. They play crucial roles in the development of clot formation and disseminated intravascular coagulation that leads to fatal organ dysfunction. Basically, fibrinolysis is a simple system compared to the complex coagulation cascade. Plasmin is the only factor that regulates fibrinolysis, and this enzyme is modulated by several factors including plasminogen activators and plasminogen activator inhibitor-1. However, recent studies have elucidated the complex regulation of the production, activation, and inactivation of these fibrinolytic factors. The dynamic change of the fibrinolytic system plays a crucial role in the pathophysiology of sepsis. In this commentary, we introduce the recent advances of the research regarding fibrinolytic system.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 3 19%
Lecturer 3 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 6%
Student > Bachelor 1 6%
Other 4 25%
Unknown 2 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 50%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 13%
Computer Science 1 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 6%
Engineering 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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
#9,365,519
of 11,717,557 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Intensive Care
#204
of 246 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#193,245
of 263,735 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Intensive Care
#8
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,717,557 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 246 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 263,735 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.