↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of mortality prediction models in acute respiratory distress syndrome undergoing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and development of a novel prediction score: the PREdiction of Survival…

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, December 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 (94th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
55 X users
facebook
5 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
98 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
Comparison of mortality prediction models in acute respiratory distress syndrome undergoing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and development of a novel prediction score: the PREdiction of Survival on ECMO Therapy-Score (PRESET-Score)
Published in
Critical Care, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13054-017-1888-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael Hilder, Frank Herbstreit, Michael Adamzik, Martin Beiderlinden, Markus Bürschen, Jürgen Peters, Ulrich H. Frey

Abstract

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is a life-saving therapy in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients but is associated with complications and costs. Here, we validate various scores supposed to predict mortality and develop an optimized categorical model. In a derivation cohort, 108 ARDS patients (2010-2015) on veno-venous ECMO were retrospectively analysed to assess four established risk scores (ECMOnet-Score, RESP-Score, PRESERVE-Score, Roch-Score) for mortality prediction (receiver operating characteristic analysis) and to identify by multivariable logistic regression analysis independent variables for mortality to yield the new PRESET-Score (PREdiction of Survival on ECMO Therapy-Score). This new score was then validated both in independent internal (n = 82) and external (n = 59) cohorts. The median (25%; 75% quartile) Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score was 14 (12; 16), Simplified Acute Physiology Score II was 62.5 (57; 72.8), median intensive care unit stay was 17 days (range 1-124), and mortality was 62%. Only the ECMOnet-Score (area under curve (AUC) 0.69) and the RESP-Score (AUC 0.64) discriminated survivors and non-survivors. Admission pHa, mean arterial pressure, lactate, platelet concentrations, and pre-ECMO hospital stay were independent predictors of death and were used to build the PRESET-Score. The score's internal (AUC 0.845; 95% CI 0.76-0.93; p < 0.001) and external (AUC 0.70; 95% CI 0.56-0.84; p = 0.008) validation revealed excellent discrimination. While our data confirm that both the ECMOnet-Score and the RESP-Score predict mortality in ECMO-treated ARDS patients, we propose a novel model also incorporating extrapulmonary variables, the PRESET-Score. This score predicts mortality much better than previous scores and therefore is a more precise choice for decision support in ARDS patients to be placed on ECMO.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 55 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 98 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 98 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 14%
Other 12 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 11%
Student > Master 10 10%
Student > Bachelor 9 9%
Other 20 20%
Unknown 22 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 49 50%
Engineering 7 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 5 5%
Unknown 28 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 39. 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 02 June 2022.
All research outputs
#1,038,632
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#817
of 6,555 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,313
of 443,738 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#22
of 79 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,555 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 443,738 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 79 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 72% of its contemporaries.