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 |
Ethanol locks for the prevention of catheter-related bloodstream infection: a meta-analysis of randomized control trials
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Anesthesiology, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12871-018-0548-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Peng Zhang, Jun-Hao Lei, Xin-Jun Su, Xing-Huan Wang |
| Abstract |
Current evidence regarding the efficacy of ethanol locks in preventing catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBI) is inconclusive. Electronic databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Library (until April 2018),were systematically searched for relevant studies. Two reviewers independently screened the retrieved records and identified RCTs that met the inclusion criteria. Relevant data were extracted for pooled analyses using Review Manager 5.3 software. Subgroup analysis was performed according to the study quality, duration of the ethanol lock, disease type and CRBI definition. Eggs' method was applied to detect publication bias. Sensitivity analysis was conducted to check the stability of the meta-analysis results. Ten RCTs involving 2760 patients were included in the analysis. The overall pooled result indicated that ethanol locks significantly reduced the incidence of CRBI (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.51-0.86). Subgroup analysis suggested that an ethanol lock significantly decreased the incidence of CRBI in patients with hematological diseases (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.31-0.80). An ethanol lock significantly reduced the incidence of CRBI in a2-hour ethanol lock group (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.33-0.73). The meta-analysis showed that an ethanol lock significantly reduced the incidence of CRBI according to analysis of high-(RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.47-0.94) or low-(RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.46-0.95) quality studies. Meta-analysis of studies with a strict CRBI definition showed that an ethanol lock can significantly prevent CRBI (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.42-0.89). The results of sensitivity analysis suggested that the pooled result was stable. Meta-analysis of adverse events showed that an ethanol lock did not increase the incidence of thrombosis (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.51-2.18) or mortality (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.90-1.08) but did result in increased nausea (RR 1.54, 95% CI 1.01-2.35), dizziness (RR 4.21, 95% CI 2.40-7.39),elevated blushing rates (RR 3.27, 95% CI 2.05-5.22) and altered taste rates (RR 2.61, 95% CI 1.93-3.54). An ethanol lock may play a role in the prevention of CRBI, especially in immunocompromised patients with hematological diseases. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 2 | 40% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 42 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 14% |
| Other | 5 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 7% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 5% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 12% |
| Unknown | 19 | 45% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 31% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 5% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 2% |
| Psychology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 7% |
| Unknown | 20 | 48% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 05 January 2019.
All research outputs
#14,136,687
of 23,096,849 outputs
Outputs from BMC Anesthesiology
#485
of 1,516 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#179,315
of 329,806 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Anesthesiology
#12
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,096,849 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,516 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 329,806 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.