↓ Skip to main content

Bench-to-bedside review: Therapeutic management of invasive candidiasis in the intensive care unit

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, December 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Readers on

mendeley
135 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
Bench-to-bedside review: Therapeutic management of invasive candidiasis in the intensive care unit
Published in
Critical Care, December 2010
DOI 10.1186/cc9239
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matteo Bassetti, Małgorzata Mikulska, Claudio Viscoli

Abstract

Candida is one of the most frequent pathogens in bloodstream infections, and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The epidemiology of species responsible for invasive candidiasis, both at local and worldwide levels, has been changing - shifting from Candida albicans to non-albicans species, which can be resistant to fluconazole (Candida krusei and Candida glabrata) or difficult to eradicate because of biofilm production (Candida parapsilosis). Numerous intensive care unit patients have multiple risk factors for developing this infection, which include prolonged hospitalisation, use of broad-spectrum antibiotics, presence of intravascular catheters, parenteral nutrition, high Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation score, and so forth. Moreover, delaying the specific therapy was shown to further increase morbidity and mortality. To minimise the impact of this infection, several management strategies have been developed - prophylaxis, empirical therapy, pre-emptive therapy and culture-based treatment. Compared with prophylaxis, empirical and pre-emptive approaches allow one to reduce the exposure to antifungals by targeting only the patients at high risk of candidemia, without delaying therapy until the moment blood Candida is identified in blood cultures. The agents recommended for initial treatment of candidemia in critically ill patients include echinocandins and lipid formulation of amphotericin B.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 135 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 1%
France 1 <1%
Indonesia 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Greece 1 <1%
Unknown 129 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 18 13%
Student > Postgraduate 17 13%
Student > Master 13 10%
Student > Bachelor 13 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 9%
Other 39 29%
Unknown 23 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 78 58%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 2%
Other 8 6%
Unknown 28 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 11 January 2017.
All research outputs
#8,535,684
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#4,397
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#57,626
of 190,769 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#24
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 190,769 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.