↓ Skip to main content

Prognostic impact of fecal pH in critically ill patients

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, July 2012
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 (80th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
58 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
110 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
Prognostic impact of fecal pH in critically ill patients
Published in
Critical Care, July 2012
DOI 10.1186/cc11413
Pubmed ID
Authors

Akinori Osuka, Kentaro Shimizu, Hiroshi Ogura, Osamu Tasaki, Toshimitsu Hamasaki, Takashi Asahara, Koji Nomoto, Masami Morotomi, Yasuyuki Kuwagata, Takeshi Shimazu

Abstract

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION: We have reported that altered gut flora is associated with septic complications and eventual death in critically ill patients with systemic inflammatory response syndrome. It is unclear how fecal pH affects these patients. We sought to determine whether fecal pH can be used as an assessment tool for the clinical course of critically ill patients. METHODS: Four hundred ninety-one fecal samples were collected from 138 patients who were admitted to the Department of Traumatology and Acute Critical Medicine, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Japan. These patients were treated in the intensive care unit for more than 2 days. Fecal pH, fecal organic acids, and fecal bacteria counts were measured and compared by survived group and nonsurvived group, or nonbacteremia group and bacteremia group. Logistic regression was used to estimate relations between fecal pH, age, sex, or APACHE II score and mortality, and incidence of bacteremia. Differences in fecal organic acids or fecal bacteria counts among acidic, neutral, and alkaline feces were analyzed. RESULTS: The increase of fecal pH 6.6 was significantly associated with the increased mortality (odds ratio, 2.46; 95% confidence interval, 1.25 to 4.82) or incidence of bacteremia (3.25; 1.67 to 6.30). Total organic acid was increased in acidic feces and decreased in alkaline feces. Lactic acid, succinic acid, and formic acid were the main contributors to acidity in acidic feces. In alkaline feces, acetic acid was significantly decreased. Propionic acid was markedly decreased in both acidic and alkaline feces compared with neutral feces. No differences were noted among the groups in bacterial counts. CONCLUSIONS: The data presented here demonstrate that the fecal pH range that extended beyond the normal range was associated with the clinical course and prognosis of critically ill patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 110 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 2%
Brazil 2 2%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 105 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 14%
Student > Bachelor 14 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 12%
Researcher 12 11%
Student > Postgraduate 9 8%
Other 25 23%
Unknown 22 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 8%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 5%
Other 16 15%
Unknown 30 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 February 2021.
All research outputs
#5,315,603
of 25,654,806 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#3,440
of 6,599 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,634
of 178,548 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#22
of 119 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,654,806 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,599 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.7. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 178,548 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 119 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.