↓ Skip to main content

Assessing protein energy wasting in a Malaysian haemodialysis population using self-reported appetite rating: a cross-sectional study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Nephrology, July 2015
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 (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
102 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
Assessing protein energy wasting in a Malaysian haemodialysis population using self-reported appetite rating: a cross-sectional study
Published in
BMC Nephrology, July 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12882-015-0073-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sharmela Sahathevan, Chee Hee Se, See Hoe Ng, Karuthan Chinna, Gilcharan Singh Harvinder, Winnie Siew Swee Chee, Bak Leong Goh, Halim A. Gafor, Sunita Bavanandan, Ghazali Ahmad, Tilakavati Karupaiah

Abstract

Poor appetite could be indicative of protein energy wasting (PEW) and experts recommend assessing appetite in dialysis patients. Our study aims to determine the relationship between PEW and appetite in haemodialysis (HD) patients. HD patients (n=205) self-rated their appetite on a scale of 1 to 5 as very good (1), good (2), fair (3), poor (4) or very poor (5). Nutritional markers were compared against appetite ratings. Using logistic regression analysis associations between dichotomized appetite with PEW diagnosis were determined as per the International Society of Renal Nutrition and Metabolism (ISRNM) criteria and alternate objective measures. Data was adjusted for socioeconomic and demographic characteristics. Poorer appetite ratings were significantly associated with lower income (P = 0.021), lower measurements (P < 0.05) for mid-arm muscle circumference, mid-arm muscle area and lean tissue mass (LTM), serum urea (P = 0.007) and creatinine (P = 0.005). The highest hsCRP (P = 0.016) levels occurred in patients reporting the poorest appetite. Serum albumin did not differ significantly across appetite ratings. Poor oral intake represented by underreporting (EI/BMR < 1.2) was evident for all appetite ratings. PEW was prevalent irrespective of appetite ratings (very good: 17.6 %, good: 40.2 %, fair: 42.3 % and poor: 83.3 %). After dichotomizing appetite ratings into normal and diminished categories, there was a marginal positive association between diminished appetite and overall PEW diagnosis (ORadj: 1.71; 95 % CI: 0.94-3.10, P = 0.079). Amongst individual ISRNM criteria, only BMI <23 kg/m2 was positively associated with diminished appetite (ORadj: 2.17; 95 % CI: 1.18-3.99). However, patients reporting diminished appetite were more likely to have lower LTM (ORadj: 2.86; 95 % CI: 1.31-6.24) and fat mass (ORadj: 1.91; 95 % CI: 1.03-3.53), lower levels of serum urea (ORadj: 2.74; 95 % CI: 1.49-5.06) and creatinine (ORadj: 1.99; 95 % CI: 1.01-3.92), higher Dialysis Malnutrition Score (ORadj: 2.75; 95 % CI: 1.50-5.03), Malnutrition Inflammation Score (ORadj: 2.15; 95 % CI: 1.17-3.94), and poorer physical (ORadj: 3.49; 95 % CI: 1.89-6.47) and mental (ORadj: 5.75; 95 % CI: 3.02-10.95) scores. A graded but non-significant increase in the proportion of PEW patients occurred as appetite became poorer. However, after dichotomization, a positive but marginally significant association was observed between diminished appetite and PEW diagnosis.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 102 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 102 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 21 21%
Student > Master 16 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 8%
Researcher 7 7%
Student > Postgraduate 5 5%
Other 15 15%
Unknown 30 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 27 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 27 26%
Social Sciences 5 5%
Psychology 3 3%
Environmental Science 1 <1%
Other 7 7%
Unknown 32 31%
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 27 November 2022.
All research outputs
#3,267,238
of 23,202,641 outputs
Outputs from BMC Nephrology
#331
of 2,508 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,315
of 263,027 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Nephrology
#5
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,202,641 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 2,508 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. 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 263,027 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 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.