↓ Skip to main content

Prediction of severe community-acquired pneumonia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, July 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
6 X users
patent
3 patents
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
154 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
211 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
Prediction of severe community-acquired pneumonia: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
Critical Care, July 2012
DOI 10.1186/cc11447
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christophe Marti, Nicolas Garin, Olivier Grosgurin, Antoine Poncet, Christophe Combescure, Sebastian Carballo, Arnaud Perrier

Abstract

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION: Severity assessment and site-of-care decisions for patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) are pivotal for patients' safety and adequate allocation of resources. Late admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) has been associated with increased mortality in CAP. We aimed to review and meta-analyze systematically the performance of clinical prediction rules to identify CAP patients requiring ICU admission or intensive treatment. METHODS: We systematically searched Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials registry for clinical trials evaluating the performance of prognostic rules to predict the need for ICU admission, intensive treatment, or the occurrence of early mortality in patients with CAP. RESULTS: Sufficient data were available to perform a meta-analysis on eight scores: PSI, CURB-65, CRB-65, CURB, ATS 2001, ATS/IDSA 2007, SCAP score, and SMART-COP. The estimated AUC of PSI and CURB-65 scores to predict ICU admission was 0.69. Among scores proposed for prediction of ICU admission, ATS-2001 and ATS/IDSA 2007 scores had better operative characteristics, with a sensitivity of 70% (CI, 61 to 77) and 84% (48 to 97) and a specificity of 90% (CI, 82 to 95) and 78% (46 to 93), but their clinical utility is limited by the use of major criteria.ATS/IDSA 2007 minor criteria have good specificity (91% CI, 84 to 95) and moderate sensitivity (57% CI, 46 to 68). SMART-COP and SCAP score have good sensitivity (79% CI, 69 to 97, and 94% CI, 88 to 97) and moderate specificity (64% CI, 30 to 66, and 46% CI, 27 to 66). Major differences in populations, prognostic factor measurement, and outcome definition limit comparison. Our analysis also highlights a high degree of heterogeneity among the studies. CONCLUSIONS: New severity scores for predicting the need for ICU or intensive treatment in patients with CAP, such as ATS/IDSA 2007 minor criteria, SCAP score, and SMART-COP, have better discriminative performances compared with PSI and CURB-65. High negative predictive value is the most consistent finding among the different prediction rules. These rules should be considered an aid to clinical judgment to guide ICU admission in CAP 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 211 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 <1%
Greece 2 <1%
France 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Guatemala 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 201 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 27 13%
Student > Postgraduate 24 11%
Researcher 22 10%
Student > Bachelor 18 9%
Student > Master 17 8%
Other 48 23%
Unknown 55 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 119 56%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 2%
Engineering 3 1%
Other 12 6%
Unknown 62 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 33. 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 21 November 2022.
All research outputs
#1,217,882
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#1,023
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,774
of 179,046 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#1
of 106 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,554 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 179,046 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 106 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.