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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Association between vitamin D deficiency and mortality in critically ill adult patients: a meta-analysis of cohort studies
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Care, December 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13054-014-0684-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yan-Peng Zhang, You-Dong Wan, Tong-Wen Sun, Quan-Cheng Kan, Le-Xin Wang |
| Abstract |
IntroductionVitamin D deficiency is common in critically ill patients, and was reported to be associated with adverse outcomes. However, the effect of vitamin D deficiency on mortality in critically ill patients remains unclear.MethodsWe searched PubMed and EMBASE from the inception to July 2014 for cohort studies to assess the effect of vitamin D deficiency on the incidence of mortality in critically ill patients. Mortality-specific odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were pooled with a random- or fixed-effect models when appropriate.ResultsSeven cohort studies with a total of 4,204 participants including 1,679 cases of vitamin D deficiency were included in this meta-analysis. Vitamin D deficiency was significantly associated with an increased hospital mortality (OR 1.76; 95% CI, 1.38 to 2.24; P <0.001), with very low heterogeneity (I 2¿=¿2.3%; P =0.402). The finding of increased hospital mortality in critically ill adult patients was consistently found in every stratum of our subgroup analyses.ConclusionsThis meta-analysis suggests that vitamin D deficiency is associated with increased incidence of hospital mortality in critically ill adult patients. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 14% |
| Italy | 1 | 14% |
| Greece | 1 | 14% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 3 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 43% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 29% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 14% |
| Scientists | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Colombia | 1 | 1% |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 87 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 13 | 14% |
| Other | 12 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 8 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 18 | 20% |
| Unknown | 25 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 42 | 47% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 3% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 1% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 3 | 3% |
| Unknown | 35 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 28 December 2014.
All research outputs
#6,571,272
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#3,726
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#81,331
of 363,202 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#72
of 133 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 74th 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 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 363,202 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 133 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.