↓ Skip to main content

Engaging clinicians and patients to assess and improve frailty measurement in adults with end stage renal disease

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Nephrology, January 2018
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 (83rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
16 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
111 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
Engaging clinicians and patients to assess and improve frailty measurement in adults with end stage renal disease
Published in
BMC Nephrology, January 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12882-017-0806-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sarah Van Pilsum Rasmussen, Jonathan Konel, Fatima Warsame, Hao Ying, Brian Buta, Christine Haugen, Elizabeth King, Sandra DiBrito, Ravi Varadhan, Leocadio Rodríguez-Mañas, Jeremy D. Walston, Dorry L. Segev, Mara A. McAdams-DeMarco

Abstract

The Fried frailty phenotype, a measure of physiologic reserve defined by 5 components (exhaustion, unintentional weight loss, low physical activity, slow walking speed, and poor grip strength), is associated with poor outcomes among ESRD patients. However, these 5 components may not fully capture physiologic reserve in this population. We aimed to ascertain opinions of ESRD clinicians and patients about the usefulness of the Fried frailty phenotype and interventions to improve frailty in ESRD patients, and to identify novel components to further characterize frailty in ESRD. Clinicians who treat adults with ESRD completed a 2-round Delphi study (n = 41 and n = 36, respectively; response rate = 87%). ESRD patients completed a survey at transplant evaluation (n = 460; response rate = 81%). We compared clinician and patient opinions on the constituent components of frailty. Clinicians were more likely than patients to say that ESRD makes patients frail (97.6% vs. 60.2%). There was consensus among clinicians that exhaustion, low physical activity, slow walking speed, and poor grip strength characterize frailty in ESRD patients; however, 29% of clinicians thought weight loss was not relevant. Patients were less likely than clinicians to say that the 5 Fried frailty components were relevant. Clinicians identified 10 new ESRD-specific potential components including falls (64%), physical decline (61%), and cognitive impairment (39%). Clinicians (83%) and patients (80%) agreed that intradialytic foot-peddlers might make ESRD patients less frail. There was consensus among clinicians and moderate consensus among patients that frailty is more common in ESRD. Weight loss was not seen as relevant, but new components were identified. These findings are first steps in refining the frailty phenotype and identifying interventions to improve physiologic reserve specific to ESRD patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 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 111 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 111 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 15%
Student > Bachelor 11 10%
Researcher 10 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 8%
Other 14 13%
Unknown 40 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 14%
Sports and Recreations 4 4%
Engineering 4 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 3%
Other 14 13%
Unknown 48 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 30 August 2018.
All research outputs
#3,560,926
of 25,402,889 outputs
Outputs from BMC Nephrology
#381
of 2,761 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#75,843
of 450,992 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Nephrology
#10
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,402,889 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,761 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 450,992 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.