↓ Skip to main content

Increased body mass index and adjusted mortality in ICU patients with sepsis or septic shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, June 2016
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 (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
82 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
154 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
143 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
Increased body mass index and adjusted mortality in ICU patients with sepsis or septic shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
Critical Care, June 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13054-016-1360-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dominique J. Pepper, Junfeng Sun, Judith Welsh, Xizhong Cui, Anthony F. Suffredini, Peter Q. Eichacker

Abstract

At least 25 % of adults admitted to intensive care units (ICU) in the United States have an overweight, obese or morbidly obese body mass index (BMI). The effect of BMI on adjusted mortality in adults requiring ICU treatment for sepsis is unclear. We performed a systematic review of adjusted all-cause mortality for underweight, overweight, obese and morbidly obese BMIs relative to normal BMI for adults admitted to the ICU with sepsis, severe sepsis, and septic shock. PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and EMBASE electronic databases were searched through November 18, 2015, without language restrictions. We included studies that reported multivariate regression analyses for all-cause mortality using standard BMI categories for adults admitted to the ICU for sepsis, severe sepsis, and septic shock. Articles were selected by consensus among multiple reviewers. Electronic database searches yielded 10,312 articles, of which six were eligible. Data were extracted by one reviewer and then reviewed by three independent reviewers. For the meta-analyses performed, the adjusted odds ratios (aOR) of mortality were combined using a random-effects model. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale for cohort studies. Four retrospective (n = 6609 patients) and two prospective (n = 556) studies met inclusion criteria. Compared to normal BMI, across five studies each, overweight or obese BMIs reduced the adjusted odds ratio (95 % CI) of mortality [aOR] [0.83 (0.75, 0.91) p < 0.001 and 0.82 (0.67, 0.99) p = 0.04, respectively] with low or moderate heterogeneity (I(2) = 15.7 %, p = 0.31 and I(2) = 53.0 %, p = 0.07, respectively). Across three studies each, morbidly obese BMI and underweight BMI did not alter aOR [0.90 (0.59, 1.39), p = 0.64; I(2) = 43.3 %, p = 0.17; and 1.24 (0.79, 1.95), p = 0.35; I(2) = 15.6 %, p = 0.31 respectively]. Only one study clearly defined how and when height and weight measurements were calculated. Site of underlying infection and illness severity may have favored overweight and obese BMIs. This is the first meta-analysis to show that overweight or obese BMIs reduce adjusted mortality in adults admitted to the ICU with sepsis, severe sepsis, or septic shock. More rigorous studies that address these limitations are needed to clarify the impact of BMI on sepsis ICU outcomes. PROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews 10.15124/ CRD42014010556 . Registered on July 11, 2014.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 82 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 143 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 1 <1%
Unknown 142 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 19 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 13%
Student > Bachelor 15 10%
Student > Master 14 10%
Other 14 10%
Other 25 17%
Unknown 38 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 65 45%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 2%
Other 15 10%
Unknown 39 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 76. 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 13 July 2023.
All research outputs
#563,257
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#378
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,230
of 367,842 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#10
of 107 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th 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 particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 367,842 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 107 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 90% of its contemporaries.