↓ Skip to main content

Diagnostic value of decoy receptor 3 combined with procalcitonin and soluble urokinase-type plasminogen activator receptor for sepsis

Overview of attention for article published in Cellular & Molecular Biology Letters, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 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
Diagnostic value of decoy receptor 3 combined with procalcitonin and soluble urokinase-type plasminogen activator receptor for sepsis
Published in
Cellular & Molecular Biology Letters, May 2018
DOI 10.1186/s11658-018-0087-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jing-jing Zhao, Xiao-Li Lou, Hong-wei Chen, Feng-ting Zhu, Yan-Qiang Hou

Abstract

The levels of decoy receptor 3 (DcR3), soluble urokinase type plasminogen activator receptor (suPAR) and procalcitonin (PCT) are significantly increased in sepsis. We investigated the diagnostic value of DcR3 combined with suPAR and PCT in sepsis. Patients with sepsis, non-infectious systemic inflammatory response comprehensive syndrome (SIRS) and healthy controls were recruited according to the diagnostic standard. We measured DcR3, suPAR, PCT, interleukin-6 (IL-6) and C-reactive protein (CRP), and the diagnostic value was evaluated by receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves. In our analysis, serum DcR3, suPAR and PCT levels of the sepsis group were significantly higher than those of the SIRS and control groups. However, IL-6, CRP and WBC showed no significant difference between the SIRS group and the sepsis group. The serum DcR3 level was positively correlated with the serum suPAR level (r = 0.37, p = 0.0022) and PCT level (r = 0.37, p = 0.0021). Using DcR3, suPAR and PCT to distinguish SIRS from sepsis, the area under the curve (AUC) values were 0.892, 0.778 and 0.692. When DcR3, suPAR and PCT combined were used for diagnosis of sepsis, the AUC was 0.933, at a cut-off point of 0.342. This combination improved the sensitivity and specificity of diagnosis of sepsis, suggesting that use of the combination of three indexes enhanced the efficiency of sepsis diagnosis.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 31 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 19%
Other 4 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 10%
Student > Bachelor 1 3%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 15 48%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 3%
Chemistry 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 14 45%

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 09 May 2018.
All research outputs
#10,305,024
of 12,913,877 outputs
Outputs from Cellular & Molecular Biology Letters
#87
of 197 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#202,085
of 269,806 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cellular & Molecular Biology Letters
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,913,877 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 197 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 269,806 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them